UFC 167 - St. Pierre v. Hendricks

[ubernoob]

Re: UFC 167 - St. Pierre v. Hendricks

People overuse robbed. A 3-2 win isnt a robbery. It was a close fight. I thought Hendricks shouldve won but he lost by a split decision. A split shows it was close.

Yeah, I wouldn't say robbed. I'll say I was surprised by the outcome... but even Florian on Twitter said 3-2 GSP right after the 5th ended.

[ex carrabba fan]

Re: UFC 167 - St. Pierre v. Hendricks

If you say Hendricks was robbed, at least explain yourself. List which rounds he won.

[redsrule]

Re: UFC 167 - St. Pierre v. Hendricks

Kenny Florian @kennyflorian
There is NOTHING in the unified rules that uses the term #damage as something that determines a winner/loser in an #mma fight. #ufc167


I do feel bad for Hendricks though, dude fought awesome against one of the best fighters ever and arguably won that fight. He showed a ton of improvement in the cardio department, but him basically giving up r5 cost him dearly.

[aholbert32]

Re: UFC 167 - St. Pierre v. Hendricks

If you say Hendricks was robbed, at least explain yourself. List which rounds he won.

Exactly. No one can give Hendricks rounds 3-5. They were clear GSP rounds just like 2-4 were clear Hendricks rounds. So it comes down to 1.

You cant call a 3-2 split decision a robbery.

[ex carrabba fan]

Re: UFC 167 - St. Pierre v. Hendricks

Exactly. No one can give Hendricks rounds 3-5. They were clear GSP rounds just like 2-4 were clear Hendricks rounds. So it comes down to 1.

You cant call a 3-2 split decision a robbery.

Definitely not a robbery, but at the same time I have always been in the camp where I can see a 10-9 round as much more dominant than another 10-9 round. With that said, the rules are the rules. I honestly didn't see any thing that showed me Hendricks was a superior fighter to GSP. Certainly even with him though.

[ubernoob]

Re: UFC 167 - St. Pierre v. Hendricks

And here we have it.

[aholbert32]

Re: UFC 167 - St. Pierre v. Hendricks

Definitely not a robbery, but at the same time I have always been in the camp where I can see a 10-9 round as much more dominant than another 10-9 round. With that said, the rules are the rules. I honestly didn't see any thing that showed me Hendricks was a superior fighter to GSP. Certainly even with him though.

I thought Johny won but it was his fault for basically giving away round 5. You cant let your feet off the gas in round 5 when you are the challenger.

[dpmx21]

Re: UFC 167 - St. Pierre v. Hendricks

Round 1 was definitely a toss-up. Georges with the early takedown, but Hendricks was only down for a second. I need to watch the fight again. I had it 48-47 Hendricks. You have to BEAT the champ though.

[redsrule]

Re: UFC 167 - St. Pierre v. Hendricks

I thought Johny won but it was his fault for basically giving away round 5. You cant let your feet off the gas in round 5 when you are the challenger.

I said the same thing on twitter. He gave away round 5 without much of a fight because he thought he was up 3-1 already. You should never do that, especially with the judging where it is in MMA.

[Dos_Santos]

Re: UFC 167 - St. Pierre v. Hendricks

Robbery gets thrown around too often, but it applies in this case because all 5 rounds were very easy to score.

And now GSP is going to run.

[aholbert32]

Re: UFC 167 - St. Pierre v. Hendricks

Robbery gets thrown around too often, but it applies in this case because all 5 rounds were very easy to score.

And now GSP is going to run.

LOL. What a ridiculous post.

[Dos_Santos]

Re: UFC 167 - St. Pierre v. Hendricks

LOL. What a ridiculous post.

Lol. Out of your element.

[ex carrabba fan]

Re: UFC 167 - St. Pierre v. Hendricks

Robbery gets thrown around too often, but it applies in this case because all 5 rounds were very easy to score.

And now GSP is going to run.

Are you saying it was 5-0 Hendricks? You have a knack for saying some off-the-wall stuff. your consistency

[aholbert32]

Re: UFC 167 - St. Pierre v. Hendricks

Lol. Out of your element.

LOL. This is par for the course for you. Anyone who wants to see a stream of ridiculous statements about MMA, Boxing or anything in general should just click on your user name and see your past posts. I would love if we could ban people for ridiculous posts but we cant.

[aholbert32]

Re: UFC 167 - St. Pierre v. Hendricks

Are you saying it was 5-0 Hendricks? You have a knack for saying some off-the-wall stuff. your consistency

Ex, he is consistent. Its hilarious man. That and he thinks people take his post seriously.