Is it me or was Bisping Given a gift last night?

**Munkymagic** · 09-10-2007 12:47 PM

Nothing of significance. Watch the fight again, Bispings face was badly damaged from the first round when he was expecting to be taken down at will and Hamill came out throwing bombs. Different people react different ways to being pucnhed, some swell more than others. Swelling and markings not only come from punches. I've been in judo matches and my face has been a fugging mess just from rubbing, trying to escape from holds etc.

Watch the fight again mate. In rounds 2 and 3 yes hamill comes forward, but lands next to nothing. Bisping is more active and throws and lands more by far. The takedowns might have been the deciding factor but hamill did nothing with them, once they were on the ground Bisping was busier.

I understand i'm in the minority but its the way i see it. It was very close and i can see how a decision could go either way. I hope there is a rematch.

**Nate17** · 09-10-2007 01:04 PM

Round one. 10-9 obviously Hamill, he took him down at will, rocked Bisping a couple of times, opened up cuts under both eyes.

Round two. 10-9 Hamill. Hamill had two takedowns, was more aggressive and controlled the octagon the whole time. They both landed shots but I think Hamill's were bigger. Bisping tried to counter punch but ended up backpedaling the whole round.

Round three. Close round at best 10-9 Bisping. He landed some big shots, stuffed Hamill twice, and worked a few subs but Hamill had some nice takedowns and worked the ground.

The worst part is Bispings lack of class after the fight. Hamill made him look bad in AND out of the ring.

Bisping got exposed, Hamill got robbed, and the fans got screwed. Everyone lost that fight.

**No Contest** · 09-11-2007 02:15 AM

HAHA, I saw it and I thought Hamil won. Now whats up MMA fans you guys are crooked too, can we start a MMA is dying thread now? With all the corrupt decisions

**amat** · 09-11-2007 02:32 AM

Munky, I swear to God I read that and I thought that was my post from the UFC 75 thread.

Great post and I agree completely and wholeheartedly. I thought Bisping won round 2 definitely. They only spent like a minute on the ground and once the heavy jab of Hammil's left then he had nothing standing up. He was moving forward but he didn't win I don't think. Bisping was countering very well that round. Round 3 was closer because of the takedowns, but Hammil controlled the stand up again and I gave him the round. I could understand this round going to Hammil, I thought it was in the air up to the very last minute and I gave the nod to Bisping. Close fight.

**skel1983** · 09-12-2007 01:08 PM

Originally Posted by Munky

Nothing of significance. Watch the fight again, Bispings face was badly damaged from the first round when he was expecting to be taken down at will and Hamill came out throwing bombs. Different people react different ways to being pucnhed, some swell more than others. Swelling and markings not only come from punches. I've been in judo matches and my face has been a fugging mess just from rubbing, trying to escape from holds etc.

Watch the fight again mate. In rounds 2 and 3 yes hamill comes forward, but lands next to nothing. Bisping is more active and throws and lands more by far. The takedowns might have been the deciding factor but hamill did nothing with them, once they were on the ground Bisping was busier.

I understand i'm in the minority but its the way i see it. It was very close and i can see how a decision could go either way. I hope there is a rematch.

Fair enough good points, but i just feel Bisping wasnt hurting Hamil, anyway some good debates.

**JT Rock** · 09-12-2007 01:30 PM

I had it for Hammil, but as Munky and Amat said there can be an argument for Bisping working on the ground and getting to his feet.

I maintain hometown desicion but as someone mentioned it could have been attributed to the popularity and revenue of the UFC in the UK

**OumaFan** · 09-12-2007 07:07 PM

I pretty much agree with Munky and Amat although at the time I scored it close for Hammil cause of the second. Bisping outworked him that round but I'm not sure he really landed much of anything. Might try to watch it again.

I haven't watched MMA for that long so I was wondering how much credit for a guy like Hammil get for taking Bisping down and then not doing anything? Just as a fan I think really who gives a shit, he didn't do anything with it, but I guess its considered scoring points.

**JT Rock** · 09-12-2007 07:38 PM

Originally Posted by OumaFan

I pretty much agree with Munky and Amat although at the time I scored it close for Hammil cause of the second. Bisping outworked him that round but I'm not sure he really landed much of anything. Might try to watch it again.

I haven't watched MMA for that long so I was wondering how much credit for a guy like Hammil get for taking Bisping down and then not doing anything? Just as a fan I think really who gives a S***, he didn't do anything with it, but I guess its considered scoring points.

Its pretty hard to take a fighter down... its leverage, technique, timing, balance and in some cases brute strength, as much as fighters train to take down they learn to defend it as well.

I think hamils lack of ground and pound as well as submissions made him a little weary to actually grapple with Bisping who is a better submission fighter. Albeit ground and pound looks like a middleschool fight it entails alot as well. You have to have steady position and balance to make sure you dont get to recrless and get armbarred or traingled and not to mentioned straight up reversed. Its all subtle skills and technique that gets overlooked by many and the sport gets denegrated as just a plain old street fight since the skill it takes gets overshadowed

**OumaFan** · 09-12-2007 08:03 PM

Originally Posted by JT Rock

Originally Posted by OumaFan

I pretty much agree with Munky and Amat although at the time I scored it close for Hammil cause of the second. Bisping outworked him that round but I'm not sure he really landed much of anything. Might try to watch it again.

I haven't watched MMA for that long so I was wondering how much credit for a guy like Hammil get for taking Bisping down and then not doing anything? Just as a fan I think really who gives a S***, he didn't do anything with it, but I guess its considered scoring points.

Its pretty hard to take a fighter down... its leverage, technique, timing, balance and in some cases brute strength, as much as fighters train to take down they learn to defend it as well.

I think hamils lack of ground and pound as well as submissions made him a little weary to actually grapple with Bisping who is a better submission fighter. Albeit ground and pound looks like a middleschool fight it entails alot as well. You have to have steady position and balance to make sure you dont get to recrless and get armbarred or traingled and not to mentioned straight up reversed. Its all subtle skills and technique that gets overlooked by many and the sport gets denegrated as just a plain old street fight since the skill it takes gets overshadowed

I mean more like how much credit points wise should a guy get for taking some one down if he doesn't do anything. Say a guy's losing the standup but not badly, its fairly close, would a takedown-even if he doesn't follow up- be enough to tip the round in his favor?

**VictorCharlie** · 09-13-2007 03:20 AM

I was very unimpressed with both of them...I thought Hamil won though but neither of these guys really belong in the 205 title or top ten picture....Is Hamil with Team Punishment? If he is its odd that his cardio was sucking so bad

**Kev** · 09-13-2007 05:51 AM

I broadly agree with Amat and Munky. I had Hamil dominating round 1, the second was close but you could make a case for Bisping winning it. The third round was definitely Bispings round.

I think a draw would have been the best result but it could have gone either way,

I thought Bisping was an absolute cock after the fight though, saying Hamil should 'go back to wrestling' as if he dominated when he came damn close to being sparked out and humiliated really pissed me off.

Best possible case scenario for me........

Bisping fights Houston Alexander next, Houston absolutely knocks him into next week and tells an excited Joe Rogan to tell Bisping when he wakes up that he can fuck off back to Cyprus.

Disclaimer

Bilbo would like to make it absolutely clear however that I in no way mean this because Bisping is a Cypriat or that I have anything against people from Cyprus, I do not, I was actually good friends with a Cypriat once. I just say it because Bisping is an arrogant cock and I want someone to tell him to fuck off back to where he came from in the same way he does to his opponents after every fight. )

:P

**Munkymagic** · 09-13-2007 09:16 AM

Also agree with Van, neither looked that impressive.

Bilbo, spot on. Bispings comments were a little uncalled for especially when you consider Hamill took his defeat on the chin like a man. Although after a fight and with the adrenaline pumping through your veins, if you have a microphone shoved under your nose you will say all kinds of shit!

Oh and also. Houston Alexander is a feckin BEAST! What was it goldberg or rogan said? "that guy is VIOLENT" lol

**Julius Rain** · 09-14-2007 07:29 AM

it was pretty close, hammil ran out of steem. he dominated bisping til he got less aggressive. I thought hammil should of won too but the decision was not that bad since its hammil that let it be a close fight.