In the Hands of the Judges

Posted on May 19, 2011, 10:48 AM by Oopsmadeyatap123
> Cool 1
|
> Poor 1

Last nights episode of The Ultimate Fighter got a lot of people in the mma community arguing.

Should Shamar have won? Or were the judges in the right giving Chris the decision. In my opinion the judges were 100 percent correct, but not because of the many reason people think Chris Cope won, which is better boxing/landing more strikes etc. I think that Chris won because of his ability to defend the takedown which, in my opinion, is just as worthy of scoring points as a takedown itself. This isnt the only fight where I believe a fighter should have won because he defended the takedown tremendously. Martin Kampmann did enough in my eyes to win his previous fight with Diego Sanchez and his ability to defend the takedown sealed it in my eyes.

So I ask you fellow Lowkickers, do you agree? Is a stuffed takedown just as worthy of a point as a successful takedown? Am I crazy? Leave your opinions below.


Comments

REGISTER OR LOG IN TO POST COMMENTS AND BECOME AN ACTIVE MEMBER OF THE COMMUNITY
  • Akrasia
    Sharp
    2
    Cool | 1
    Funny | 0
    Weak | 0

    JDS shouldn't be too surprised about the decision. All Bailey did was press Cope against the cage a few times, he couldn't hold him there or do damage. And he couldn't get a single takedown.



    Bailey may have held the centre, but he didn't actually strike convincingly or aggressively. Cope was pushed back because he was weary of the takedown - and he won more of their exchanges.



    I thought it was a very good call by the judges. Labelling Bailey as the winner would be another example of giving too much credit to bad wrestling and lean 'n' pray tactics.



    They definately need to intergrate good defence into fight scoring more. If you shoot for a takedown and your opponent throws you off, that is a case of you being out-matched/ out-skilled.



    I'm not saying people shouldn't be given credit for dictating where the fight goes and control, this is different, it's about justly rewarding skill and not rewarding failure.

    Reply 2 years ago
  • postmortem
    Cool
    1
    Funny | 0
    Weak | 0
    Sharp | 0

    i think the judges got it 100 percent correct while chris may not of dominated him he did dictate the where the fight took place and out landed his opponents strikes at least 10-1 a takedown should count for something but an attempted takedown doesnt . if you have had your last ten takedowns stuffed all you are really doing is stalling the fight.

    Reply 2 years ago