UFC 167 - St. Pierre v. Hendricks

[GiantYankee]

Re: UFC 167 - St. Pierre v. Hendricks

You have no idea about my background so you should just step away from the keyboard before you no longer are permitted to spout your ridiculous crap on this board.

Anyway back to the fights for everyone else. Who fights for the belt next? Hendricks v. Condit/Brown? Hendricks v. Lawler?

Hendricks vs Lawler. I think that could be a great fight.

[redsrule]

Re: UFC 167 - St. Pierre v. Hendricks

Just hope you understand that your posts are pure comedy to a big group of us. You are so far removed from your element that it is hilarious that you try and act like you have an understanding of the game.

Go find a fighter and see how long he listens to you without giggling.

Who is this big group? As far as I can tell, there are only about 10 or so "regular" poster in these forums. Last time I checked you are the only one that gets into this kind of stuff because everyone else is capable of having rational discussions.

Dana is going off on NSAC right now on FS1.

He should be, but not for the reasons he is. The fact that Kim Winslow is reffing fights while Big John can't in Nevada is ridiculious.

[WizardJay]

Re: UFC 167 - St. Pierre v. Hendricks

Not at all. This stuff happens (also in boxing) because judges are incompetent for the most part. GSP and Jones are bad examples as well, because cases can be made for both of them winning the fight.
If it was for fan favorites Tim Bradley would have never have gotten the win over Pac, or recently over Juan Manuel Marquez.

My post is about the UFC not boxing.

As for Jones and George both were getting dominanted, Jones couldn't get a takedown to save his life. And physically George couldn't hang with Hendricks.

[GiantYankee]

Re: UFC 167 - St. Pierre v. Hendricks

Im interested to hear why you gave 2 to GSP. That was the round where he was rocked twice by Hendricks.

Honestly I don't remember. I scored the fight on a napkin with no notes.

[aholbert32]

Re: UFC 167 - St. Pierre v. Hendricks

Who is this big group? As far as I can tell, there are only about 10 or so "regular" poster in these forums. Last time I checked you are the only one that gets into this kind of stuff because everyone else is capable of having rational discussions.

Thats why I'm here and not on Sherdog or the UG. I love talking to you, Pappy, Ex, p_rushing and all the other guys about this sport. I actually dont give a **** about new people coming to this forum because I know you guys will always have interesting and rational takes on MMA. Thats why it annoys the hell out of me when people like him come here and just say unsupported BS.

[aholbert32]

Re: UFC 167 - St. Pierre v. Hendricks

Honestly I don't remember. I scored the fight on a napkin with no notes.

I understand. I cant even remember why I gave Hendricks round 1. Great fight no matter how you scored it.

This year has been incredible and we still have Weidman/Silva 2 in about 6 weeks.

[redsrule]

Re: UFC 167 - St. Pierre v. Hendricks

My post is about the UFC not boxing.

So you are saying they fix decisions for the more popular fighters? Why did Frankie Edgar beat BJ Penn (easily the biggest selling/most popular sub 170 lber in the UFC) at UFC 112? Same goes for Rory Mac tonight over Lawler? There are a bunch of times where the "popular" fighter lost a close decision, but just because both Jones and GSP kept their belts in close decisions they are automatically rigged?

[aholbert32]

Re: UFC 167 - St. Pierre v. Hendricks

My post is about the UFC not boxing.

As for Jones and George both were getting dominanted, Jones couldn't get a takedown to save his life. And physically George couldn't hang with Hendricks.

Jones didnt get "dominated." Never seen a fighter get "dominated" in a fight he almost finished in round 4. FYI, I thought Gus won that fight.

[p_rushing]

Re: UFC 167 - St. Pierre v. Hendricks

I scored it 3-2 hendricks, giving him 12 and 4, and giving GSP 3-5, But I thought round 2 was closer than round 1, I thought 1 was clear for hendricks. i'll re watch it again tomorrow, but I didn't think it was a total robbery even though I felt Hendricks won.

I have the fight 3 rounds to 2 for GSP. Rounds 2,3, & 5 for the champ. This fight was so close that I would have been okay with a Hendricks decision. Hate that GSP revealed that he may retire right after the fight. I know Rogan prodded but I can see a lot of criticism coming his way.

Im interested to hear why you gave 2 to GSP. That was the round where he was rocked twice by Hendricks.

I also thought round 2 was closer. Hendricks had 2-3 shots, but if GSP was hurt, he didn't show it much. Then GSP's output was better. So its the case of do you give it to the one who hit harder or the one who connected more?

The other rounds weren't that close.

[GiantYankee]

Re: UFC 167 - St. Pierre v. Hendricks

I understand. I cant even remember why I gave Hendricks round 1. Great fight no matter how you scored it.

This year has been incredible and we still have Weidman/Silva 2 in about 6 weeks.

Can't wait for that fight. I watched the first fight at a Buffalo Wild Wings in Sagus, MA with a a lot of Brazilians fans. It was bananas.

[aholbert32]

Re: UFC 167 - St. Pierre v. Hendricks

I also thought round 2 was closer. Hendricks had 2-3 shots, but if GSP was hurt, he didn't show it much. Then GSP's output was better. So its the case of do you give it to the one who hit harder or the one who connected more?

The other rounds weren't that close.

Good point. I usually judge close rounds by asking "who landed the most damaging/significant strikes?" Thats why Hendricks gets round 2 for me.

[WizardJay]

Re: UFC 167 - St. Pierre v. Hendricks

So you are saying they fix decisions for the more popular fighters? Why did Frankie Edgar beat BJ Penn (easily the biggest selling/most popular sub 170 lber in the UFC) at UFC 112? Same goes for Rory Mac tonight over Lawler? There are a bunch of times where the "popular" fighter lost a close decision, but just because both Jones and GSP kept their belts in close decisions they are automatically rigged?

Not saying all but for the ones that count more. Its like they don't want to see the "best" lose.

[redsrule]

Re: UFC 167 - St. Pierre v. Hendricks

I understand. I cant even remember why I gave Hendricks round 1. Great fight no matter how you scored it.

This year has been incredible and we still have Weidman/Silva 2 in about 6 weeks.

Don't forget Mighty Mouse/Benavidez 2 as well. I know a lot of people aren't big fans of flyweights, but that is a hell of a fight. Shame Pettis got hurt or we'd have Pettis/Thomson as well.

[WizardJay]

Re: UFC 167 - St. Pierre v. Hendricks

Jones didnt get "dominated." Never seen a fighter get "dominated" in a fight he almost finished in round 4. FYI, I thought Gus won that fight.

Thanks for the one round heads up.

And FYI majority thought Gus won.

But politics that he lose.

[GiantYankee]

Re: UFC 167 - St. Pierre v. Hendricks

Don't forget Mighty Mouse/Benavidez 2 as well. I know a lot of people aren't big fans of flyweights, but that is a hell of a fight. Shame Pettis got hurt or we'd have Pettis/Thomson as well.

Not excited about Johnson/Benavidez 2 because Mighty Mouse handled the first fight with ease.