Quote Originally Posted by armin View Post
I had this 235 for gsp, i know people might disagree with me on round 2 most likely but gsp got a bit wobbled but thought he did more than enough to actually take it. Sherdog is loosing their shit as always after a close fight screamin robbery left and right, and to habe this 4-1 hendricks as dana did is idiotic as 3 and 5 were CLEAR gsp rounds, if you score those for hendricks you smokin some hard shit me thinks. Lets see the rematch i think this is as good as hendricks can do but gsp can do better

Oh no you didn't. You can't give GSP round 2. You just can't. It's counter-intuitive to how MMA scoring works. Hendricks beat him up that round.

I do agree though that guys like Dana are really blowing this out of proportion. This was a fight that came down, quite simply, to round 1.

Hendricks clearly won 2 (to date, you are the only person who I've seen who scored that GSP) and 4, and GSP clearly won 3 and 5.

In round 1, Hendricks did the better work. He landed some nice counter left hands, he landed a ton of brutal knees to the thigh, he landed a ton of elbows to the side of GSP's head as he was defending the takedown (which resulted in big damage to GSP's eye), and he generally outworked GSP in the clinches and grappling exchanges.

Problem is, although Hendricks' attacks were much more effective and damaging, they were also much more subtle. GSP attacked with a lot of quick, explosive, flashy techniques (headkicks, ect) that, although they weren't landing, were really more "eye catching" to the judges sitting at ringside, who, like in boxing, don't always have the best vantage point to really take in the action, what's blocked, what lands, ect.

So while I think it should be clear to anyone who knows MMA that Hendricks won round 1, I can understand a live judge going the other way. Not that I agree with it, but I can understand why they would.

So when people act like this is the worst decision in history, they are really blowing it out of proportion. Shogun/Machida 1 was much worse, where Shogun dominated and arguably won every round and got robbed. This was a fight that was decised by one relatively close round. It went to the champ, it is what it is.

The wrong guy got the nod, but when it's as far from decisive as that, I don't think you can call it a robbery, or start questioning corruption.

I think the average fan forgets that MMA is judged on the 10-point must and judge the fight as a whole. Hendricks clearly won the war by a large margin, because he busted GSP up without really taking much visible damage himself.

But when you look at it round by round like you're supposed to, it is a lot less decisive.