Quote:
|
Originally Posted by dagreat1
Since when is MMA judged on damage? St. Pierre would've lost to Penn if that were the case but St. Pierre won because of TAKEDOWNS...
Research the rules, some of you are being fucking retarded and it makes this board look ignorant when so many people can't grasp the simple rules of MMA judging, organization to organization.
Shamrock got taken down at will, his TD defense was non existant, his guard was passed at will and he was completely controlled ont he ground, he couldn't get back to his feet, only throw knees to the body from the ground, that is not going to win you the round when you get taken down, controlled and have your guard passed at will.
|
Actually damage is a part of the NA judging system in mma. You can go back to an interview on fcf radio in november that had a guy who judges mma and kickboxing matches for nsac. and damage is one of the pieces used to score and judge a fight.
i do agree the renzo took frank down at will, and was able to keep postion and improve postion while on top.
they also judge a fight on trying to finish. renzo never tried to finish he just had control. didn't throw many shots from the top and never went for a sub.
that being said. although frank probably did more damage to renzo. they probably did score the first round for renzo, just for td's and top control.
i do agree that shamrock was much better than renzo standing. the longer the fight went the better it would have been for renzo. renzo was taking more damage and frank could have worn him down for the finish.
although it sucks the fight had toi be stopped. i think we say that frank is still able to fight and a good level. shake off a bit more of the ring rust and he's still a game fighter. renzo has had a few good fights in the last year and i think it was a goo gauge to see where frank really is.