 |
 |
|
 |
07-06-2008, 01:59 PM
|
 |
I love MMA
Reputation: ∞
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 3,523
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by mattc25
....I agree with you on everything,but imo Forrest squeaked out the 4th round.
|
Whoa, you won't get much consensus there  That was the most clearcut Rampage round, in the eyes of the judges and probably 90%+ of fans.
__________________
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
 |
|
|
07-06-2008, 02:02 PM
|
 |
/G\
Reputation: ∞
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Southern California
Posts: 4,752
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by rivethead
Henderson and Rampage didn't have a 10-8 round. This fight was a good fight, but it really wasn't that close. If Henderson/Jackson didn't warrent an immediate rematch, this one certainly dosn't.
Forrest won it, fair and squarely. If Jackson can admit it, his fans should be able to as well.
rh
|
i didn't even think round 2 was a 10-8 round. niehter fighter was doing much. forrest was throwing punches but only a few were doing much. rampage attempted to get out, but it was evident the leg kicks owned him beforehand so he was resting up.
i'm not saying Forrest didn't win, i'm just saying i thought it was a draw at first.
and i'm not a Rampage nor Forrest fan.
regardless, the fight was awesome. i was actually hoping for it to stop in the second via leg kick. i would have gone crazy.
__________________
Gegard Mousasi- 22-2-1
"However great the kindness and the efficiency, in every hospital death there will be some cruel, squalid detail, something perhaps too small to be told but leaving terribly painful memories behind, arising out of the haste, the crowding, the impersonality of a place where every day people are dying among strangers"
|
|
07-06-2008, 02:09 PM
|
|
Rookie
Reputation: 75-79
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 10
|
|
man, there is way too much rationalizing going on that Rampage won.
"take out the 2nd round"
"dis-regard the leg kicks"
listen to that, and tell me if that makes ANY sense. to take out a part of a fight.
|
07-06-2008, 02:11 PM
|
|
/G\
Reputation: ∞
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Southern California
Posts: 4,752
|
|
right now, i dont see how Rampage really won. as i said, a draw makes more sense than that.
Forrest won, and now we can see Wandy vs Rampage III
this is a win-win for everyone.
__________________
Gegard Mousasi- 22-2-1
"However great the kindness and the efficiency, in every hospital death there will be some cruel, squalid detail, something perhaps too small to be told but leaving terribly painful memories behind, arising out of the haste, the crowding, the impersonality of a place where every day people are dying among strangers"
|
07-06-2008, 02:25 PM
|
 |
Internet Top Team
Reputation: ∞
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 7,182
|
|
lol @ all the arguing when the judges scorecards were a complete mess (Rampage only won R1 on one scorecard)
IMO it was Rampage 48-47 but there isn't really a right answer, because the judging criteria is clearly broken
|
|
|
|
07-06-2008, 03:17 PM
|
 |
neg'd 4 lyfe
Reputation: ∞
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 3,484
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Intellectual
i didn't even think round 2 was a 10-8 round. niehter fighter was doing much. forrest was throwing punches but only a few were doing much. rampage attempted to get out, but it was evident the leg kicks owned him beforehand so he was resting up.
i'm not saying Forrest didn't win, i'm just saying i thought it was a draw at first.
and i'm not a Rampage nor Forrest fan.
regardless, the fight was awesome. i was actually hoping for it to stop in the second via leg kick. i would have gone crazy.
|
So what is your definition of a 10-8 round? Forrest scores the hard leg kick that drops him, attempts the sub/takes top, improves position and landed some hard shots in the flurry.
Rampage did absolutely nothing...zero offense, and his defense was ineffective.
So what constitutes a 10-8 round if there isn't a point deduction?
rh
__________________
The UFC used to be about the best fighting the best. I understand that the goal of a business is to make money, but their heavyweight situation makes them a pathetic joke.
|
|
|
|
|
07-06-2008, 05:33 PM
|
 |
Monkey Fist on a Stick
Reputation: 750+
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Montana
Posts: 717
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigsemi
how forrest wins every part of the fight and they have him losing seems strange, unless i'm missing something, if i were to look at those results and not seen the fight i would have thought forrest beat the shit out of rampage. i guess the one knock down swung it to him?
|
good thing there is no judging based on what the fighters face looks like after the fight. Forrest definitely loses that one!
Quote:
Originally Posted by smoogy
lol @ all the arguing when the judges scorecards were a complete mess (Rampage only won R1 on one scorecard)
IMO it was Rampage 48-47 but there isn't really a right answer, because the judging criteria is clearly broken
|
Agreed that judging criteria is broken. This fight isn't the most egregious example (of the 8 people at my house, 5 had Forrest winning, 3 had Rampage winning), but had this been a split decision, with the winning card being the judge that scored it 49-46?
Shit would have hit the fan...
__________________
"And the fight lasted as long as Brett Favre's retirement!" -- His future is brighter than Steven Hawking!!!"---Mauro Ranallo
Last edited by Clint; 07-07-2008 at 09:17 AM.
|
|
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
|
|
|
| Thread Tools |
|
|
| Display Modes |
 Linear Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is On
|
|
|
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:05 PM.
| | | | |
