RealGM

These state atheletic commisions are killing MMA, just as they did Boxing. Im not really hear to argue which ones should be gone (Cecil Peoples), so much as the decision itself. Shogun pushed the pace, landed the last strike of almost every exchange, he inflicted the most damage, and albeit in a different style, Muay Thai kicks as the opponant evaded.

The game plan was executed perfectly, Machida leans back to evade punches, so hit him in the base, the same premise in boxing, chopping down a tree. The vent is over.

I don't wanna go to conclusions without knowing who scored for who, but I recall Peoples being part of several controversial decisions.

Sign me up for this one though. I didn't even think that fight was close, let alone a split decision win for Machida. He's one of my favorite fighters, but that was just terrible

They announced the scorecards and are easily obtainable so its not like its secretive, ALL THREE judges scored it unainimous, I think 48-47 Machida.

Big time screw job. This is a clear example of the tired old boxing theory of you have to kill the champ to take his title. Shogun won 4 rounds, controlled the fight, and landed more shots. He dominated this fight in every way you are supposed to.

The crowd started pro-Machida and ended up booing him the entire time he talked. That speaks volumes.

Yes, Cecil Peoples is one of the worst judges. I don't understand how he still has a job?

I don't see how Machida won more then 2 rounds? I had it scored 4 rounds to 1 for Rua.

I don't know. Machida's head was still on his body. That has to win him a ghost round or three.

Complete trash decision. I'm still shocked.

besides the obvious, the bettors were putting alot, ALOT of money on Shogun for value. Obviously thats the first thing that will be cited.

My theory is they use alot of these boxing purists/ignorant MMA judges to score their cards, because these atheltic commisions dont understand the difference. I japan they use Matt Hume, why cant we implement a system like that (not too say the Japanese arent corrupt, far from it). I think they value punching more than any other criteria. Sure there was stuffed takedowns you could score, but Machida never attempted a shot to be stuffed, and perhaps the knees when Shogun shot in. So really if you give the punching advantage, we could all cite 5 different criteria Shogun didnt just win, but dominated.

I don't think Shogun was robbed. I think it was a close fight, and i think Shogun really did win, but come on. It was very close.

No need for conspiracy theories here.

I disagree. All this talk of a split decision is useless, a split decision doesn't necessarily mean a fight was close then a unaminous decision, it just means one ref disagreed with the other two. In this case, all three judges scored the fight 48-47, meaning machida won by one round. It can be argued that Machida took all three first rounds, the only real round i felt shogun won was round 4, round 5 neither fighter did much of anything, round 2 was a victory for Machida and round 3 was a decisive victory for machida, and round one wasnt much fireworks but machida got the better of the exchanges.

Shogun pushed the tempo more then Machida just barely, because of the legkicks he consistantly threw. But both fighters back peddled on advances or parried them, the only difference was shogun kept chasing machida while machida stopped chasing after shogun backed away. I dont think the useless agression on Shogun's part deserves him any points. As far as the exchanges though, i thought Machida clearly won most of them. He was just quicker then shogun and landed more precise punches. Machida also, particularly in the first three rounds, kept countering shogun the second he was trying to throw a muay thai striking combo. That resulted in lots of clear shots on Shogun, which resulted in him changing his tactics to low kicks in the later rounds, which did gas Machida. But the answer to who won more exchanges was still clearly Machida, and the body kicks on Machida really didnt do much damage so you cant argue that damage played a factor to shogun winning the early rounds. Machida also had the best round of the fight in round 3, where he nearly finished Rua like he did Rashad against the cage, Shoguns best moment came when Machida tripped.

Bottom line, Machida won more exchanges in the early rounds and the fight as a whole. Shogun did more damage in the later rounds and Machida gassed preventing him from countering as well, but Shogun didnt do enough damage in the last two rounds to make up for all the lost exchanges in the previous rounds. Very close fight, I expected it to go the distance but was disappointed Machida gassed near the end, but to be the champ you have to beat the champ, and shogun never had Machida in trouble.

First off, it wasnt JUST leg kicks, I guess im the only with HD, because his ribs and thighs were bruised up, ALA Forrest/Rampage and didnt Forrest win because of it?

Second, your argument that while Shogun did push the pace he did it wrecklessly? Ill accept the argument he got stunned late in the third, but it was BECAUSE of the early DAMAGE to his legs that he couldnt use his superior footwork and lunge in and out of exchanges, and the reason no one had him winning the last 2 rounds. So lets say it didnt affect him the first three rounds, the fact he landed them consistently unlike these supposed exchange wins for Machida. You dont beat Machida by lunging in, allowing Machida to lean back, then counter, you cut the distance and attack his base. Great gameplan. After the first round they were icing his quads, they werent doing it because he was sprawling or had a pulled muscle.

Third, the argument you have to beat the champ to be the champ is the most illogical argument ever, because does that mean to win, NO judges decisions. Does that mean even closer decisions automatically go to the champion, I dont think so.

I cant wait until compustrike releases their numbers, because the ones who had Machida winning that fight will have less to account to that fluky win. This isnt boxing, people lose sight of that, punches arent the determining factor in winning in MMA. Ive trained for 6 years now, and love the sport, but too often in combat sports are they decided by less then savory individuals, not the fighters themselves.

I'm a Machida fan and I am really excited for a rematch. That said I thought Shogun won this time...blame the judges and they need to do a Silva vs. Shogun fight regardless.

Press conference on right now-
http://mmajunkie.com/news/16610/watch-t ... ie-com.mma

Edit- Dana basically said he wants a rematch as soon as possible.

http://fightmetric.com/fights/Griffin-Rampage.html

For those that think leg kicks alone cant win you fights. Remember it even scored a knockdown by Rampage which, Machida never had.

And im glad Dana is scheduling a rematch, but all to often guys come in with a surprising gameplan, and cant emulate it the second time around due to adjustments, etc... Not saying Shogun cant win a rematch, but it just seems unlikely he'll get to implement that same strategy.

If anyone saw the countdown show, and interviews, it seemed as if Shogun was giving the impression he was working his BJJ more and wanted to take this fight to the mat, but apart from clinches, he didnt really try to many takedowns, and used the clinch primarily for rest and knees. but this is DEF a rematch worth seeing.

Your first point is what exactly? That they weren't just leg kicks? because he got a bruise that means they score more points? his fighting style was unchanged throughout the first three rounds of kicks to the midsection. It wasnt until shogun landed kicks to the leg and machida gassing did he lose his aggression. Also, for the record i disagree with the Forest/Rampage decision as well. But the difference in that fight was Forest caught Rampage early in the fight while Rua didnt damage Machida until the 4th round when it was too late.

Your second argument is clearly biased. How exactly does Shogun have superior footwork? I thought it was machida who has the best hit to being hit ratio in the history of the UFC not Shogun. And what early damage to Shoguns legs are you talking about. If that was such a game changer for shoguns game wouldnt that prove that Machida won the first three rounds. And my point about Shogun pushing the pase was that in the first three rounds it was a complete illusion. Both guys landed kicks, and both guys attack and both guys backed stepped or parried. The difference was that Shogun would chase machida when he backed away, while Machida would let Shogun set up and not chase him around the ring, which is very wreckless. Shogun only became the aggressor in the fight in the 4th. As for the exchanges, the reason machida won them was because in the first three rounds he landed way more shots because he was simply faster in counter punching. Most of the exchanges went with Shogun starting a forward combo, and then getting punched in the face before he could even lunge in. Machida also suprisingly won all the Muay Thai clinches which youd think would be SHoguns speciality, and he stuffed all of Shoguns takedowns. The only exchanges shogun really won in the first three rounds was the one where he connected with a hook, and the few where he finished a Machida attack with a counter leg kick.

You're third point is also misconstruding my point. Machida was never in trouble in that fight. The closest anyone came to being finished was shogun in the third. The most strikes in the early rounds were landed by Machida. And the only time when Machida was gassed and injured, Shogun was able to do NOTHING to even come close to finishing him. Did not do nearly enough in the 5th to award a two point victory, which is what he would have needed at that stage in the fight to win.

Its easy to look at the last two rounds, see Machida losing a round for the first time in the UFC, and forget about the last three rounds and declare Shogun the winner. But as much as you may hate boxing, judging MMA and boxing, particularly stand up matches like this, have more similarities then differences. Damage did not win Machida the fight, striking did. Shoguns damage to machida in the 4th, and machida gassing in the 5th were not enough to outweigh Machidas striking advantage in teh earlier 3 rounds. If you follow Machidas whole career, you will see this is not the only fight that he has won in this exact same fashion, Machida had no KO power till he started working on his strength and even then he is still one of the lesser KO guys at 205. Machida should really be at 185 but he wouldnt move down because he refuses to fight his friend Anderson Silva. The way Machida beats bigger stronger fighters is through wining exchanges, and the only difference in the fight was that he los thte last two rounds instead of winning all of them. You want the fighters themselves to determine the fight, but the reality was Shogun never came close to finishing Machida. Shogun never came close to earning 2 points in a round either, and Shogun lost 3 rounds.

I'm confused about how anyone can say Machida won that fight, leg kicks or not. Who controlled the fight? Shogun. Who pushed the pace? Shogun. Who landed the most strikes? Shogun. Who landed the most effective strikes? Shogun.

In what world of judging could you even consider giving that fight to Machida?

And LOL at the guy posting above me saying Machida won the 5th round. That was the round he looked the worst.

It really wasn't a close fight.

This was even worse than the Hamill/Bisping match.

It was so one sided I was only half paying attention to the results announcement.

I said Machida won the first three rounds and Shogun won the last two. You cant argue who pushed the pace, who hit harder etc etc in a point scoring decision match based on rounds. I think its obvious that Machida won the 3rd and Shogun won the 4th and 5th, the question is in the first two rounds. And in those rounds Shogun hardly pushed the pace, and he hardly damaged machida, and Machida won the majority of the exchanges. Thats why he won the fight. And the 5th round wasnt much of anything, the $th round was the more decisive victory for Shogun.

Please tell me why do you believe Shogun dominated the first two rounds so much? Most of what i hear are just arguments for the fight overall but that does not hold up in a point scoring round system.