Most seem to agree that the current system lacks the requisite nuance for MMA, but there is as yet no consensus on which scoring system would best serve the sport. The decision had the effect of once again raising the issue of how fights should be scored. However, Hendricks clearly won the fight, even if he arguably lost the contest, doing far more damage to his opponent than he received in return. It was not a bad decision, and the judges did not deserve the criticism they received. Johny Hendricks welterweight title bout from UFC 167.Īs I argued afterward, the bout clearly highlighted how easily one can win the fight while losing the sporting contest.īased on the 10-point Must System, one can make a convincing argument that St-Pierre deserved the nod. No fight better demonstrates how flawed the sport’s scoring system is than the Georges St-Pierre vs. It was an extremely close contest that could have been scored either way, but I actually saw the fight for Bisping the second time around. However, Bisping scored heavily on the feet as Hamill began to drop his hands from fatigue.ĭespite taking place in “The Count’s” backyard, boos could be heard from the live crowd after the decision was read. Positionally, Hamill dominated most of the round, taking the Brit down and keeping him on his back for a significant portion of the final frame. The final round was particularly difficult to judge. The second was a much closer affair, with Hamill’s pace slowing and Bisping getting on his bike and scoring points from the outside.
MMA DECISIONS FULL
The first clearly belonged to Hamill, who came out like a man possessed and battered Bisping for the full five minutes. Who deserved the nod really comes down to how one scores Rounds 2 and 3.
Michael Bisping’s win over Matt Hamill at UFC 75 in London is often cited as an egregious example of hometown judging.īut having recently rewatched the fight, I think the decision looks more reasonable than it did on initial viewing.
0 kommentar(er)
