RealGM

This Condit/Diaz thing has really blown up.

I find the debate fascinating. At its core are fundamental questions about what this sport is about. It's an important debate to be having right now as we're seeing the mainstreaming of MMA.

Predictably, people play the "you're not knowledgeable if you disagree with me" card. Happens in any sport. There is a lot of grey area in MMA. There are, IMO, major flaws in the way winners and losers are determined, but hopefully the sport will continue to grow and improve. Hopefully some growth will come out of this fight.

I have heard more of the "you're a bloodsport fan, I appreciate the sport" criticism lately. Maybe it's a way for new fans to feel superior. I don't know. I do know that I'd rather watch a Barboza/Etim spinning heel kick KO than a Guida/Pettis lay n' pray. I'd rather watch Machida really hurt a seemingly invincible champ, giving it his all before falling to the better man than watch Condit avoid exchanges with a fearless striker, grinding out a win by landing 60 more low kicks while getting beat to the body and head. Yeah, I like the violence. It's a part of the sport. I want to see fights finished. It's more impressive and it says something about the fighter. I think they understood that in the PRIDE days.

For me, MMA is the purest sport in the world. It's overtaken hoops as my first love and that's really saying something. The whole "two men enter, one man leaves" thing. Sorry for quoting Thunderdome . People have always wanted to see fights. Some people have wanted to test themselves in the greatest physical way - unarmed combat - to see who the better man is.

It's a very democratic sport. In fact, Ed Herman's family was watching the fight at the same bar I was at last night. Herman's dad was wearing one of his old walk out shirts. His mom was watching the fight through her hands. It was really something watching Herman's mom watch her boy fight. His dad went to the bathroom immediately after the fight. He was sweating bullets. I love that a guy like Herman can fight on the main card of a UFC event. He's not THAT different from the rest of us. He was an early Team Quest guy. I've trained with guys who have trained pros. I work with a guy who was mentored by Randy Couture. Hell, I sold a nutritional bar to Chael Sonnen at the food co-op I was working at a few years ago. It's another piece of what makes this sport so special. We better enjoy it while it lasts.

I think MMA is fine. I just think that some of the fans need a reality check.

To these fighters winning comes first. Entertaining is 2nd.

I personally don't think Diaz did much to win that fight. Last time i checked taunting doesn't win you any points.

This whole "natural born runner" is stupid. Diaz fans need to grow up and need to stop babying a grown man. Diaz fans are crying way more than Diaz did.

I like Diaz. He's an exciting fighter he just didn't do anyhting to counter Condit's gameplan. Thats on his camp and his coaches. They expected Condit to trade shots with DIaz but he didnt. He had an actually gamplan that he followed and it can seperate champs from chumps.

Condit did exactly enough to win based on what he and most importantly, Greg Jackson knows about current UFC judging. He's doing what 98% of fighters would do when given solid advice on how to win a fight. They COULD fight like Nick Diaz but then take the risk of outright losing via stoppage or decision at the expense of an exciting fight. This is usually what happens to fighters, especially coached by Greg Jackson, approaching elite status.

Sour grapes from people who wanted to see Diaz/GSP or people who think MMA should be rock em sock em robots.

The state of MMA is just fine.

You don't know what you're watching if you think the mere fact of Diaz coming forward means he must be winning. And vice versa for Condit/losing. Things changed in rounds 3 and 4 and the striking of 5. Tons of people didn't see how. All sorts of comments in the other thread claim Diaz dominated the entire fight. That's why they're being harangued as not being knowledgeable. That's not knee-jerk superiority. It's true.

This transcends Diaz/Condit... but cool story guys.

Ten point must system needs to be tossed.

That is your opinion. Make that a poll. I really hope there is nobody who agrees with you.

CZAR85 wrote:That is your opinion. Make that a poll. I really hope there is nobody who agrees with you.

You like the ten point must system? It's a boxing system. It works for boxing because there are more/shorter rounds. Doesn't work very well for MMA.

I agree with that. IMO Rampage/Machida is the poster fight for the flaws of the 10 point must.

First two rounds could have gone either way easily, razor thin. The third, Rampage got his ass BEAT.

Rampage wins the fight. lol.

I think the 10 point must system would be fine if

a) Judges were more willing (able?) to use the full range of scores more liberally. That means frequent use of 10-10s, obviously 10-9s, more 10-8s, and even some 10-7s. If it results in more draws, fine. Some fights ARE draws.

b) Finding judges who actually know who won a round. This is the big one. Changing the scoring system won't make a bit of difference when there are still judges who think the wrong guy won a particular round.

As for the general state/direction of MMA, I think it is fine. I'd love to see a back and forth war as much as anyone, but I appreciate anything that means you are doing what you want to do, and stopping your opponent from doing what he wants to do. Sometimes I'll find it boring, but sometimes stick and ball sports are boring too. The only thing I have a real problem with is stalling/anti-fighting behaviour.

Oh, I also want to add that I personally feel "effort to finish the fight" should be the top criteria judges use.

And I know it has Diaz/Condit in the title, but please do what you can to comment on the OP's general points/arguments, not just as they specifically relate to Diaz/Condit. We have two threads going on for that already, but I think this thread stands on the merit of MMA strategy/judging/rule discussion.

SabasRevenge! wrote:This transcends Diaz/Condit... but cool story guys.

Ten point must system needs to be tossed.

I agree the ten point must system needs to go. But, Condit would have won even more convincingly under Pride scoring because the rounds he won he won a lot more decisively than the ones Diaz won.

I'd like to see refs and retired fighters get into judging. Joe McCarthy judged a recent Strikeforce event. Just knowing he was one of the judges gave me more confidence in the legitimacy of the outcomes. A lot of the better refs (like Dean and Yamasaki) have trained/fought MMA and would make great judges. I wish we could clone them so they could judge and ref. Many MMA judges are boxing judges who somehow got approved by the state commission to judge MMA. The qualifications vary. Jarman and Peoples are already known as bad boxing judges. Why are they judging MMA?