Tie, both fights in Toughman
Lumberjack Ole Thorsen(?) def Phil Baroni
Sam "The Rattler" Rodriguez def Phil Baroni
In the first fight with Ole Thorsen, Baroni lost 2 points for fouls, one for a knee to the head and one for a late hit (immediately following a clean knockdown, Ole is flat on his back, tilts his head up, and Baroni drills him one more time.) An argument could be made that Baroni should have been DQed for the fouls, but that's the ONLY way I can see Baroni losing this fight. Baroni CLEARLY DOMINATED the entire fight, scoring at least one knockdown though I think there were 2. So let's just assume it was 1, here's how the scoring would look:
deduct 2 points for Baroni's fouls, and he STILL wins by 2 points at the very least. Yet SOMEHOW, they gave the decision to the other guy (who had 0 skill but survived the fight via bearhug.)
I just watched the Baroni-Rodriguez fight a minute ago, so the details of that one are fresh in my mind. Baroni knocks Rodriguez down seconds into the fight with a beautiful punch. Rodriguez gets up but is still wobbly. Baroni jumps all over him, landing a flurry, ref steps in for a standing 8 count. Baroni again jumps on him, pounding away! Ref steps in with 10 seconds left, for the apparent TKO victory for Baroni via 3 knockdown rule. But no! Ref just asks Rodriguez if he is ok, gives him time to recoup, BUT DOESN'T COUNT IT AS A KOCKDOWN! This part I do not understand. There is no rule anywhere that you can stop the fight just to save a fighter and not count it as a knockdown. You can stop it to check a cut, you can stop it as a standing 8 count or to stop the fight, but you can't just stop it to give the guy a rest. Score the round 10-7 Baroni.
Round 2: Rodgriguez pulls out a miracle, and lands a punch that sends Baroni reeling right off the bat. Baroni seems to have punched himself out. Rodriguez comes at him with a flurry, landing a lot but not doing much damage. Midway through the round Baroni gets his bearings and starts fighting back, and takes over and has Rodriguez in trouble late. I'd say this round is either even or 10-9 Rodriguez.
Round 3: Almost an exact replica of round 2, minus the punch that hurts Baroni. Rodriguez gets him early in the round and has Baroni seemingly in trouble, but Baroni comes back late in the round to take over again. Again I say draw, but I can see the argument for Rodriguez 10-9.
Now let's look at this. ABSOLUTE BEST CASE SCENARIO for Rodriguez is:
r1: Baroni 10-7
r2: Rodriguez 10-9
r3: Rodriguez 10-9
This gives Baroni the win by a point. Easily r2 or 3 or both could have been scored a draw, making Baroni's win margin even larger. Easily r1 SHOULD have been stopped, giving Baroni the TKO win, or scored 10-6 (if you counted the 3rd knockdown.) Any way you look at it I can not see any reason to give the fight to Rodriguez. And yet, he won a UNANIMOUS decision, it wasn't even split! All 3 judges had him winning!
For the record, both were HIGHLY entertaining fights and if you have a chance to see them I recommend doing so. Baroni's comments and antics are classic, even better than anything he's shown in the UFC in my estimation.
Tie, both fights in Toughman
breaking down and scoring old toughman fights lead me to believe you might have a problem. or maybe they judge w/ Pride criteria.
axel shulz/george foreman
"breaking down and scoring old toughman fights lead me to believe you might have a problem."
I just rewatched the fight simply because it was one of the most entertaining fights ever. And after watching it, you can't help but wonder how in the hell Baroni got such a bum deal. They clearly loved to hate him as both times he really got ripped.
I know boxing has had some really poor decisions, and I've seen some really bad ones, but none that were as clear as Baroni's toughman fights. I haven't seen Byrd-Oquendo though.
Cmon guys comparing shady boxing decisions to toughman is a stretch, lets just stay on topic. remember the title says combat sports.
Endo beat me to it - toughman is NOT a sport!
that's a good point, Toughman is pretty bush league to begin with. I was just pointing out that I've watched a lot of fights, and those were the 2 worst decisions I've ever seen anywhere.
The worst ever is Gholar vs. Johil. The fight wasn't even close. Gholar beat the piss out of Johil. By the end of the fight, Johil was bleeding everywhere and literally hiding himself underneath the net in the corner of the ring to make it difficult for Gholar to reach him and hit him anymore. And Johil STILL won the decision.
Most baffling thing ever. I guarantee there will never be a worse decision. It would be like scoring Tito/Couture in favor of Tito.
I'd kinda like to see that.
is anyone old enough to remember schulz/foreman?
foreman got his ass beat bad
I think I got everyone beat. I had three fights that should be no-contest or DQ's but they either stopped the fight or gave the dec to my opponent.
Screw job #1
John Renken vs. Joe Gerolimier
In this fight Joe had three fouls in a 1 10 minute round. He gave me a few nut shots, punch I believe to the throat, and something else that I dont remember. The ref gave him 3 penalties. The fight was stopped he was warned and then it continued. Well the judges awarded him the fight...not sure how, but they did.
Screw job #2
John Renken vs. Mike Rangel
Tito was the ref and Mike was behind me and punching me with closed fist in an open hand only match punched me repeatedly to the body. Then towards the end of the match punched me in the shoulder and back of the head several times and Tito stopped the fight for failure to defend myself against shoulder punches and back of the head punches.
SCREW JOB #3 WHICH IS THE WORST IN MMA HISTORY
John Renken vs. El Indio
Tito was once again the ref. El Indio closed fist punched in an open hand match, bit me on the neck, eye gouged me, choked me with a foreign object, kicked a downed opponent, stuck his thumb in my ear and I couldnt hear for a week, and I tapped because tito would just warn him for his violations.
Synopis...Renken has had some of the worst screw jobs ever.
PS. ALL VIDEOS ARE AVAILABLE...CONTACT JEFF OSBORN
Saint, it does sound like you got screwed over a bit there, but those weren't judges' decisions.
Sounds like a John Renken-Tito Ortiz grudge match needs to happen!
"Score the round 10-7 Baroni."
Bradu, I have never seen a round in boxing scored 10-7. Give Baroni 10-8 cause thats what the refs would have given him
rizzo-coleman..coleman won 98% of that fight.
Foreman vs. Briggs was pretty bad. Foreman took it well though.
"Bradu, I have never seen a round in boxing scored 10-7."
That's not true. 10-8 is generally for a dominant round, which means a knockdown. Multiple knockdowns usually means more points. I'm positive I've seen 10-7 and I think I've probably even seen 10-6, but I'm not sure about that. I do beleive it's possible though.
Jeebuz Tito must be a worst ref than Landless.
ie seen multiple knockdowns in one round before and theyre all scored 10-8