On first viewing and i believe it was judged by rounds, right? I say 2-1 Sak (Sak takes 1, Royce 2, Sak 3).
Again, Royce had no significant offense whatsoever this time around. He def scored well with the front kicks and i was also impressed on his counter leg shots as Sak would come in after being kept at bay by Royce's leg kicks though (Sak countered and controlled each one of those shoots).
However, Sak drops Royce in round 1, passes his guard to side, controls his back on the ground and also controls Royces back twice in round 3 with somewhat of an armbar attempt at the bell.
Now, as most bjj guys usu judge fights by submission grappling technque, im sure they would see this for Sak if they were to take those same standards to the flipside. Royce did not do enough scoring to outweigh Sak's grappling positioning imo.
It could well just be a draw too but I honestly would give it to Sak for the significant offense.
Now it was a boring fight but MF a fucking audience that would boo Sak and Royce!! Fuck you LA.
I felt Royce was much more active then Sak and that he should have won. I'm not sure Royce was knocked down in the first round. Two judges thought he was, one thought he wasn't. If he was, then 29-28 Royce, as was seen by the two judges, was the score I would have given. If Royce was not knocked down then 30-27 would have been my score. I felt 10-9 instead of 10-8 if in fact Sak scored a knockdown because IMO Royce's kicks from the guard both to the legs and head dominated the round.
Hawk
Even if Royce wasnt dropped from being stunned, it was still had to be scored as knock down even if Royce flopped to guard because he elected to flop after getting hit in a punch (though it would def NOT have been a 10-8 either way too imo).
Still, Sak took Royce's back 3 times, had the armbar attempt in the end on top of dropping Royce and the knees (none which connected imo). Sak's offense was much more significant than Royce's imo.
Not that it really matters though. It could have been a draw and it really didnt matter at this point anyhow and it turned out to be lackluster in the end.
Though, when Sak went for the armbar at the last second, it could been Sak/Renzo all over again...
"fight had me a little depressed, it was like a bad, cash in movie sequel to a great first installment."
True, true but thats what all rematches are to some degree. You never know whether a rematch will turn out to be "good" but the bottom line is whether a rematch is necessary based on the first fight and the point of careers of both guys thereafter.
Also think Royce did seem to give Sak a look after getting up from the bell as if he actually thought he got "retribution." Then again, Nog raised his hands after his third fight with Fedor.
Btw, if Royce did win, isnt it a win for kickboxing or karate?
"
Even if Royce wasnt dropped from being stunned, it was still had to be scored as knock down even if Royce flopped to guard because he elected to flop after getting hit in a punch (though it would def NOT have been a 10-8 either way too imo).
Still, Sak took Royce's back 3 times, had the armbar attempt in the end on top of dropping Royce and the knees (none which connected imo). Sak's offense was much more significant than Royce's imo.
Not that it really matters though. It could have been a draw and it really didnt matter at this point anyhow and it turned out to be lackluster in the end.
Though, when Sak went for the armbar at the last second, it could been Sak/Renzo all over again...
"fight had me a little depressed, it was like a bad, cash in movie sequel to a great first installment."
True, true but thats what all rematches are to some degree. You never know whether a rematch will turn out to be "good" but the bottom line is whether a rematch is necessary based on the first fight and the point of careers of both guys thereafter. "
I think alot of you are over looking the shots landed by Royce from his back the punches after the knockdown and the up kicks. His leg kicks and knees to the legs also added up. Shots to the legs are always underatted but they cause more damage than most realize.
As in the "pros" judging UFC, Pride, K1, etc are always right?
"no way was that a knockdown"
Sometimes you get "knocked down" as you get hit off balance and not necessarily that you are rocked. Either way, if you elect to flop to your back to avoid further potential danger after someone's hit you and put you in an awkard squatting position, your opponent should still get credit for that because you knocked yourself to the floor to retreat from your opponent's offense.
Call it what you want. Sak hit Royce, Royce went down.
"Royce pushed the fight and had the conditioning to follow his game plan."
Does getting dropped, having your back taken, defending an armlock equal "pushing the fight"?
Royce was "pushing the fight" during most of the standup, yes, but imo his offense was more minor than the signifcant things Sak did (see above). It was close enough to be debatable i guess but if i thought all you gracies guys always complain that grappling is never taken into enough consideration by american judges? Is this one of those fights that you are ok with that?
I believe the pros do a better job then guys on the forum especially when half the guys posting didnt see the fight and base thier opionen on what is posted here.
and that still wasnt a knockdown and I know that if you saw the fight then you know it wasnt a knockdown.
Just asking because sometime you debate on here for a few days and then find out the other person hasnt saw the fight.
why do you feel your opionen counts more then mime?
anyway even in boxing if a person goes down after a punch it is not always ruled a knockdown, there are slips, trips and pushdowns and they are not scored as knockdowns
"This is why I like the center of MMA to be in Japan not the states because they are free to set their own rules due to no hierarchical draconian oversight of the athletic commissions."
It is pretty sad and ironic that in Japan they've got more freedom for MMA than we do here in the USA, a place that is SUPPOSED to be the "land of the free and the home of the brave."
This was on TV last night in Japan, and I really have to question how Royce was awarded the W for the fight, especially Cecil Peoples giving round 1 to Royce.
Royce had no affective attacks, and did zero damage throughout the three rounds. Sakuraba was going at half pace adimttedly, but he went for submissions, and did the better of the grappling portions. Royce did zero damage with his kicks (though I'm not sure they were thrown with the intention of doing damage), and showed nothing on the mat.
Props to Sakuraba for not raising a fuss, and giving Royce a hug and Helio a big smile at the completion of the match, despite how he must have been feeling inside.
Paul Carrol is correct. It blows my mind how some people think Royce "easily" won that match. It was a Sakuraba win by any objective standard. Should've been a draw because nothing really happened, but again if you had to a pick winner you would pick the guy that had more effective grappling and striking.
reasonmethis - you seem a little mentally unstable or immature. If you can't discuss things in a civil and balanced manner then you can't expect people to return the favour to you.
I don't believe I am the forum's premier Japanophile, but I do live in the country and can provide some insight in to Japan rather then the Hollywood version which is how most people here seem to treat Japan.
Back to the fight, can you please explain how you believe that Royce deserved the W ?
Dam, your bitch, ease back for a sec. Your acting like Sak's corner threw in the towel and then as if Sak's fans were bitching about the 3 round fight that Sak specifically asked for. Most of us know your credibility is no credibility but are you actually gonna sit here and act as if the decision was a slam dunk?
If Sak's knee was fucked, it certainly didnt show in the fight (where it counts).
Royce was more active and pushed the pace on the feet but all the significant offense was from your immortal hated, Saku. Royce's kicks were just 'keep the opponent at bay' kicks, you know, like the so-called pillow fighting you supposedly despise so much?
Sak dropped Royce, Sak passed Royce's guard, Sak took Royce's back 3 times, Sak went for the armbar at the end. I wouldnt say it was a home run for Sak either but i think if anything, since Sak was the only one that did anything substantial, he deserved the decision. It also coulda been a draw and im not that upset that Royce took it since it was pretty insignificant from both ends.
But for someone to whos supposedly 100% pure joojheetso and anti-pillow fight, point striking, Sak did everything you feel fighters should do and Royce did everything you hate.
Of course, its perfectly expected and accepted that your criteria change due to your favoured fighter.
Anyhow, woo hoo, Royce won a debated decision with front kicks that were just meant to keep Sak at bay. Another victory for joojheetso.