By Dave Doyle
It's clear three days after the fact that the Carlos Condit's unanimous-decision win over Nick Diaz will go down as one of the most hotly debated fights in UFC history.
Everyone has a take, as is clear from the 446 (and counting) comments in my most recent blog post, Did you see the pictures of Nelson's face after the fight? I'm not in any way implying that aggression and Octagon control be the only factors considered in the fight, just pointing out that they're actually listed in the Unified Rules and seem to be too often ignored.
Pa-boy says: You don't like the judge's decisions then end the fight yourself.
Can't argue with that one, amigo.
Wb says: Thank GOD! I thought after some of the other articles I'd read (and comments I'd received) I was one of the few who thought that fight was judged incorrectly!!! Let me state, I do NOT have a problem with Condit getting the nod (personally I scored it 3/2 for Diaz but could see how it might have been judged 3/2 Condit). Still after having seen the judges scorecards its hard to understand what fight they were scoring or more specifically by what criteria. 2 of the 3 gave Condit the second round!? For the record that was the only round that Diaz out-struck him. To say that Carlos won 4 of the 5 rounds on judges sheets seems to indicate they have no concept of octagon control or aggression and were simply counting strikes.
Eddie, via Facebook, says: absolutely agree with your article on the diaz/condit fight. the judges' criteria include ring aggression and generalship: basically who's bossing the fight. this isn't boxing where you can dance and outpoint your foe with jabs.
Wb, Eddie, you guys are clearly smart people with bright futures.
No comments:
Post a Comment