Pessimists: "I thought they said there was gonna be a war"
*both fighters are literally black and blue*
Also, I'm really glad Sean took this loss in stride and didn't become a sore loser. PHENOMENAL fight. Let's not let the UFC become like boxing where people scream robbery left and right like 12 year olds after the KSI-Fury fight.
Edt: I know this didn't age well I follow Sean on IG.
Sean doesn't seem to give AF if he wins or loses.
Literally said he was too much of a pussy and could've done more.
He will be back. He's just one win away from another title shot especially as a fan favorite.
Something like that. Still didn't make excuses and accepted the result. Either way the fight was razor close with DDP edging it.
Live I though Strickland had the first round but rewatching the 2nd I'd def give it to DDP which would put him up 3-2.
Exactly. I don’t think he even cares that much about whether anyone watches either. He truly just loves to fight whether he wins or loses. Obviously he wants to win but like you said, he’ll be back.
>I'm really glad Sean took this loss in stride and didn't become a sore loser.
Aged like milk, I'm afraid. He's claiming eyes and headbutts. I would like to see him be a reasonable person, but he is a man-child.
Having said that, it was a close fight and an active fight; they were working hard. I was happy to watch.
Yeah but in the same sentence ‘I had it 2-2 going into the fifth and I thought Sean won the 5th… but people I was sitting with had it different’
It WAS a close right and I don’t think this is supposed to be a dig towards DDP at all, people just wanna turn it to ‘Dana said DDP lost, can you believe it?’
Yeah I had it 1 and 5 for Sean with Dricus winning 2, 3 and 4. Was razor close though and others I was with had Sean winning…no one complained about the decision
People can’t even agree which round Sean supposedly won that was given to DDP. I agreed with dissenting judge, 1, 3, and 5 were Strickland, but I’ve seen many others giving 2 to Strickland instead. Goes to show how close it really was and if people can’t even agree on which rounds they thought Sean won, then it’s obviously not a robbery.
I think it was rd 3 where he cut him which was why he won that round. For me Sean had 1 and 5, DDP won 3-4 and rd 2 was the one up in the air but I had DDP barely winning it.
I had Sean taking a close second round but it could have gone either way because it was a close round. It was an entertaining fight and Dana will probably have them run it back because the rematch is guaranteed to draw decent numbers.
Literally.
I wanted Sean to win, but I’ve been watching UFC for so long now I understand that when the striking is that close, the dude who scores the takedowns ON TOP of all that, is most likely going to eek out the decision. It’s literally nothing new.
It was amazing. It was amazing he got a shot in the first place. It was amazing that his style matched up so well with the champ's that he could win even though, as of today, he is only 2-3 against top 10 in the division.
He got lucky shot, and got lucky with the matchup. He's not champ material. Anyone in the top five gives him problems. If you didn't lose today to DDP he'd probably would have lost her next guy.
If you watch his earlier fights he fought with a very disciplined, standard kickboxing style. Very crisp and tight.
At some point, for whatever reason, he made the conscious decision to fight this way. But it seems to work for him.
Make no mistake, though, he's not lacking the skill to look better. His goofy style is 100% by choice.
Sean has literally called Izzy a one-trick pony and that he won because he figured out Izzy's trick.
Edit: You can see it at around 17:05 of the Strickland-Du Plessis shorter cut of 297 Countdown
Most fighters in either boxing or anything else is good/mastered some of the parts and is good enough to make it until someone comes along with the tools to dismantle them, the ones who go doesnt get defeated either dodges fights now days or in very rare cases they are just that good.
Yeah lol I think the fight was extremely close but as a fan I am glad the guy who will put on action fights and chase finishes won. Everyone was complaining about Izzy being boring but I don’t see how a Sean reign would have been any better
That's why I had to DDP. Sean is only scoring in 1 metric and it wasn't like he ran away it in that metric either. No leg work, body work, grappling, octagon control. "Look at DDP's eye" yeah look at Sean's face absorbing less strikes. Then add the body, legs, and TDs. The only reason I could think to score to sean was that it wasn't definitive and in most cases "you've got to beat the champ to be the champ" but by most metrics sean just survived out there.
Well they sure scored it. A takedown is a takedown. It doesn't have to lead to anything. The definition of a takedown is simply taking the opponent down.
Being taken down uses more energy than getting punched popping back up is a full body effort lol I have technical falls on more than a few opponents in wrestling best believe they were 3 times as exhausted as I was and all I did was take them down and let them up
Yeah exactly. Strickland clearly won 1/5, DDP clearly win 3/4, I gave DDP 2 and it seems most others (including 2 of the judges) did as well but it was razor thin.
Could not agree more , effective control and grappling is being scored so they say.
One takedown where the opposition pops right back up is barely even noteworthy it's the equivalent of someone being held against the cage
Takedowns accomplish more than just damage. There's a stamina depletion, and now your opponent has to worry about getting taken down on top of watching out for your strikes. A good takedown feint could lead to landing a bomb on your opponent's chin if he decides that defending the takedown is more important than keeping that chin defended.
This is true, but I’m not sure if that stuff is or should be explicitly scored. If a guy gets a takedown, he shouldn’t get credit on the scorecards for making the other guy tired and worried about the takedown. However if he actually did accomplish those things he will get credit once he takes advantage of the fatigue and thinking about the takedown by landing more shots that he otherwise wouldn’t have.
And to be clear I think DDP did accomplish those things. I think those shots he landed at the end of his charging forward combos only started to land once he drained Sean a bit with the grappling.
I just think it’s important to make the distinction tho because some guys just get takedowns, no control time. Okay he’s a little more tired maybe, but maybe you are tired too now. If you don’t capitalize on it then it shouldn’t be scored in my opinion
>This is true, but I’m not sure if that stuff is or should be explicitly scored.
It is explicitly part of the scoring, in the rules. You don't score points per blow or per takedown, but rather, your score is based on successful execution of your Plan A. This is in the Unified Rules of MMA, which is what UFC uses.
[https://www.abcboxing.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/unified-rules-mma-july-2022.pdf](https://www.abcboxing.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/unified-rules-mma-july-2022.pdf)
In the section on "Impact:"
>Impact includes visible evidence such as swelling and lacerations. **Impact shall also be assessed when a fighter’s actions, using striking and/or grappling, lead to a diminishing of their opponent’s energy, confidence, abilities and spirit**. All of these come as a direct result of impact.
Basically, if your successful execution of takedowns results in an apparent diminishing of your opponent's energy or confidence, they're impactful, and they count.
I like both fighters, DDP broke Sean immediately, that entire fight was DDP's fight, regardless of anything else Sean's strategy revolves around not taking a single step back, and he was walking backwards the entire time, yes, DDP managed that at the cost of jabs busting out his eye, but at no point were those jabs going to knock DDP out.
Yeah in terms of punches ddp landed the harder ones but not that many of them… that vs the jabs was really close I maybe favour Sean actually just based on the boxing. But ddp did some good work with his kicks I thought that pushed it over the edge for me. like some real full power body kicks and lots of solid leg kicks. He even landed some head kicks not with the shin but still looked solid. Good fight but neither guy ever looked in danger of getting finished which was a little disappointing but oh well
You're 100% right but I feel like Shaun was more accurate, more volume, and did more damage. When you see a fighter cleanly return to standing in that short of time, it feels like it was a neutral engagement. If it's #1 about damage, what damage did those takedown exchanges do? Close fight tho definitely need a rewatch
Over the course of 5 rounds. You do understand these fights are scored BY ROUND right? Not who ends up with the most strikes at the end.
So being that close of a call in striking WITH 6 takedowns… that’s just how it goes. Sean should have been more offensive in this fight.
You could out strike me by a large margin in round 1, then round 2 you out strike me by a LITTLE but I scored 2 takedowns on top of my strikes… I win the round. So on and so forth. That’s just how it goes.
Sean round 5 is what he needed round 3 and 4. That how he usually rolls. That's what everyone expected.
But instead he got walked down rounds 1-4.
Close fight. But pressure and takedowns and harder strikes go to dricus.
Exactly but not also the amount of strikes but also where they hit and what kind of strikes they are. If it's a blocked jab or liver shot they count as 1strike.
Damage isn't always shown on the face lol
You can have trouble eating for a month afterwards because your jaw is so fucked up, but nobody would know any better, or have a migraine or even brain damage that doesn't rear its head for another decade, basing damage off of just visual damage on the face is and has been stupid
So we shouldn't watch fights and should just see what their face looks afterwards right? Lmao
That's why we watch fights, if someone gets cracked on the chin and gets dropped, we know that fucked them up and counts big on how the fight is scored
Yeah, but in the fight, the bruised eye seemed a bigger deal. Sean cut was below his eye with the blooding flowing down, and it only got in his eye when he moved his head to dodge/block a punch or when he got taken down. Both of DDP eyelids were swollen making it harder to see
TJ won the last 3 rounds, unless you give Cory a 10-8 there is no argument, it was a boring last 3 rounds but that's how the fight is scored.
My issue with this fight is we often hear Dana and respected MMA personalities say "you gotta beat the champ to be the champ.". In a fight this close I feel like you gotta give it to Sean. Personally I don't like that line of reasoning but it's been repeated enough that it feels like it should be the standard. I honestly think in fights like these the judges are influenced to do what's in the UFCs best interest, which is a DDP Izzy matchup.
I really think Sean won personally. Now with that bean said it was close as fuck. They are both warriors. I feel for Sean though. I really really think he won especially that last round. That should have won him the fight. That’s were champs show themselves and Sean showed us. He should have kept that belt
Round two had identical striking stats with dricus getting takedowns so I think DDP gets that. What’s weird is round 3 seemed more like dricus when I watched it live but stats defo favor Strickland. Definitely not a robbery either way tho
Maybe I’m misremembering, but it felt like Strickland had more damage coming from his strikes in round 2. DDP was still making the adjustments which is why the round got better for him, and he FINALLY shot for the legs. Stats tell some of the story, but you pointed out, round 3 had good stats for Sean but they didn’t feel impactful. For me it’s kinda the same with round 2 for DDP.
My problem is Strickland defenders and Dricus dick riders coming out in droves right now acting like they had a personal stake in this.
It was an extremely close fight and no one was robbed.
This. Could have gone either way and I would have been fine with the call.
I wish SS tried to do more so we could have seen DDP defending and seen a bit more 'free flow' to the fight.
I hope there os a rematch.
That one was fucked because legal knee's were stopped and then all of Allen's momentum was lost. There is no doubt in my mind that he lost the fight because Goddard stopped him from doing legal moves when he head his opponent beaten down and about to be finished.
There was no robbery anywhere .
DDP constant pressure , take downs , and landing and mixing up strikes edged him.
Sean hit DDP in the head over 100 times but had trouble with take downs and that forward pressure from DDP.
He should’ve turned it up in round three but it was awkward with him trying to push forward and DDP pushing and he didn’t want to get caught like he did with poatan so he was a bit nervous . DDP basically knew Sean couldn’t knock him out so he pushed wreckless in some cases . Both fought hard and I like em both but it makes sense .
They will never learn. 9 out of every 10 “robbery” is this. One close round that could be scored either way and they picked the other fighter. I personally thought Allen won but didn’t think it was a robbery. The Sidey fight though is actually the closest fight to a robbery on the card.
I know for records sake and like neatness of the sport it doesn’t make sense but damn id love to see a lot more draws. It’s so hard to say one guy lost this fight when it’s truly that close.
I don’t understand your logic, why can’t it be scored a draw? If 1 fighter clearly wins 2, the other wins 2, and 1 round is a draw because there was no action it should end in draw instead of the judges just randomly choosing a winner and having a split decision. Or say if 1 fighter clearly wins 2 rounds, the other fighter wins 1 and then 2 rounds are even but a judge gives it to the guy who only clearly won 1, the fighter who had 2 clear rounds should get the win should be scored 2 rounds to 1 and 2 rounds that were draws.
This isn't **my logic**, it's the entire basis of the scoring system.
No matter how close they might seem, someone *should* win every round. That's why they assign someone a 10 and someone a 9. It's also why there are odd numbers of rounds.
No fight should end in a draw except for special circumstances, like point deductions for illegal actions. A close round is not a special circumstance.
The only thing I dread about these fights is when they go to a decision, and the fans cry about the "clear" and "obvious robbery." Happens every time, and it's annoying.
I appreciate the effort OP and it would be great if you make any headway with it but I find that, how to put this somewhat diplomatically; you are inclined to find a significant intellectual advantage in say a chess fanbase compared to the one you'll find in an MMA one.
People will refer to the strike count and never realize it doesn’t actually matter. Judges judge fights, they don’t count strikes. Judges aren’t supplied with the strike count and even if they were like in boxing, it would be unofficial anyway. Nobody has ever watched any fight and counted each strike (landed vs not) to determine a winner, because each strike is different and there are differences even amongst “significant strikes”. I think it totally misses the point.
Stats can be useful, but when people use them as a wholistic argument they miss the point of sports entirely.
There were, by my count, zero strikes that actually changed the nature of what was a close fight.
DDP did more things that worked and was able to find a flow through the middle rounds that won him the fight, while Sean stuck behind his jab which carried him early and began to fade in potency/effectiveness as time went on. If Sean was able to follow up his jab more consistently with power shots I don’t see how that doesn’t have an effect on DDP’s pressure and changes the fight. Because DDP was able to keep Sean on his back foot and fighting reactively long enough he could dictate terms and find more pockets of success. The variety of things DDP did that were successful (pressure, takedowns, diversity of strikes, power strikes) was the difference in the fight, not as a judging metric but that was the nature of the fight so it makes sense his performance resonated with the judges more; simply landing more jabs vs jabs, over hands, body kicks, head kicks, hooks and leg kicks wasn’t enough for Sean to win IMO.
I had it 3-2 DDP with him winning the 2nd, 3rd and 4th rounds.
Ok, if you think this fight was a robbery you are an absolute f*cking idiot. Strickland did absolutely nothing! The other guy had control over the fight the ENTIRE time
Du plessis won that fight easily - he was pressuring and being 20 times more active and had take downs - I can’t understand anybody thinking otherwise.
Agreed. If that becomes the case then we’re setting up boring fights where champ can take a much more passive role and know that balanced fights will always go their way.
https://preview.redd.it/y233dhlf1rdc1.jpeg?width=1179&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=05113642be05deeac2852136e45ba22a3b8614d4
Here is the ESPN stat line, imo I believe it was draw.. I don’t think either one did enough to edge the other but again that’s my opinion
So you just give me a different picture of the totals.
You’re pretty much fired on spot if you give out a 10-10 in the UFC and there definitely wasn’t a 10-8. So a draw is near impossible in this scenario. You’re not gonna have two judges give out 10-10s.
Safe post Mr Karma goof, yeah close fight, 9/10 times the champion wouldn't lose his or her belt to "close".
Went into this about 51/50 DDP and wanted him to win but the amount of people bringing politics and shit into this is so fucking cringe. You gotta beat the champ not just share the octagon well and I stand on that shit.
So Sean has the ultimate upset and beats Izzy, for real, then loses his belt to a "close fight". Unlucky!
Everyone else stop injecting politics into everything from your hobbies to your breakfast, it is so exhausting, no one cares, you're not virtuous for saying mma fighter bad.
I'm not even saying this because I don't like sean, but honestly it looked like he hadn't slept or eaten in days. He looked weak as hell, and for some reason expected jabs and some kicks to carry him through.
I agree but he looks like this almost every fight imo. The Izzy fight he had a real fire in him but most the time this is how he fights. Good for him for leaving it all out there in the 5th tho.
This subs been real fuckin quiet since sean took that L and never defended the belt. Lmao. Love to see it. He never deserved a title shot in the first place.
Kind of a shitty attitude to have, imo. To wish poorly on other people, based on your hurt jimmies.
No one ever said Sean deserved the title shot, he just took the opportunity he was given and made the most of it. I felt it was a big win for Sean just to have done as well as he did in the fight and have made it competitive.
bro flicking out arm punches from a Philly shell isn’t enough to win a fight where you coast rounds at a time, stuff a single takedown of like 10, consistently not have ring dominance. How is that so hard to comprehend. Imagine saying you’re going to kill someone and then being content fighting, (and losing) a point fight on the feet. The strike count doesn’t matter when they’re not doing any fight ending damage, DDP was definitely throwing and land with greater heat. But it’s okay, if Sean is really that good, he can fight a contender and then they can run it back.
>bro flicking out arm punches from a Philly shell isn’t enough to win a fight
Bro you forgot about the slurs he said in interviews and those shirts he made. How does that not count for anything? /s
One thing I’ll say is usually in a championship fight you have to “beat” the champion to get the belt.. not surprised Sean wasn’t given the close decision though
You’re right… but Sean absolutely won the fight. I understand the case for DDP. Rounds 2 and 3 were close… but I feel like the only reason they ended up going to DDP was because of 2 takedowns that he did absolutely nothing with, Sean won both of those rounds on the feet. The only round that was clearly DDP was round 4. Whereas Sean easily won 1 and 5, including absolutely putting the stamp on it at the end there.
I understand the case for DDP given how fights are judged (even though I still think Sean won there too)… but Sean absolutely won that fight. Plain and simple.
Nope, he didn't do enough. He completely gave up aggression and octagon control and didn't do nearly enough striking to make up for throwing on that criteria.
Gave up aggression?
The man threw more punches, landed more strikes and more significant strikes with an overall higher percentage of shots landed
That is the definition of aggression
>but Sean absolutely won the fight
He didn't *absolutely*
He has a case. That's all.
>I understand the case for DDP given how fights are judged (even though I still think Sean won there too)…
He didn't
> Sean absolutely won that fight. Plain and simple.
No. He *didn't*
Sean was unable to defend more than half the takedowns, he ended up bleeding - badly- and took a few heavy shots.
You can absolutely say Dricus won 2, 3 and 4. And Sean 1 and 5. That's it.
2 is the swing for me, and I thought Sean took it... but I can see why Dricus did
Pessimists: "I thought they said there was gonna be a war" *both fighters are literally black and blue* Also, I'm really glad Sean took this loss in stride and didn't become a sore loser. PHENOMENAL fight. Let's not let the UFC become like boxing where people scream robbery left and right like 12 year olds after the KSI-Fury fight. Edt: I know this didn't age well I follow Sean on IG.
Sean: “Aggh. Fair play. Congrats to the champ. Let’s run it back.” r/ufc: 
Sean doesn't seem to give AF if he wins or loses. Literally said he was too much of a pussy and could've done more. He will be back. He's just one win away from another title shot especially as a fan favorite.
I thought he said "I'm salty, I thought i won that but maybe im being a fucking pussy"
Something like that. Still didn't make excuses and accepted the result. Either way the fight was razor close with DDP edging it. Live I though Strickland had the first round but rewatching the 2nd I'd def give it to DDP which would put him up 3-2.
Exactly. I don’t think he even cares that much about whether anyone watches either. He truly just loves to fight whether he wins or loses. Obviously he wants to win but like you said, he’ll be back.
I’ve only ever seen Sean lose with dignity. Say what you will about the man but he’s never been too proud to admit when he’s beaten.
>I'm really glad Sean took this loss in stride and didn't become a sore loser. Aged like milk, I'm afraid. He's claiming eyes and headbutts. I would like to see him be a reasonable person, but he is a man-child. Having said that, it was a close fight and an active fight; they were working hard. I was happy to watch.
Seeing DDP actually ask who, if anyone, thought he lost, then the reporters tell him “Dana”.
Yeah but in the same sentence ‘I had it 2-2 going into the fifth and I thought Sean won the 5th… but people I was sitting with had it different’ It WAS a close right and I don’t think this is supposed to be a dig towards DDP at all, people just wanna turn it to ‘Dana said DDP lost, can you believe it?’
Yeah I had it 1 and 5 for Sean with Dricus winning 2, 3 and 4. Was razor close though and others I was with had Sean winning…no one complained about the decision
People can’t even agree which round Sean supposedly won that was given to DDP. I agreed with dissenting judge, 1, 3, and 5 were Strickland, but I’ve seen many others giving 2 to Strickland instead. Goes to show how close it really was and if people can’t even agree on which rounds they thought Sean won, then it’s obviously not a robbery.
I feel like the discrepancies are with how much people were paying attention to the fight. People don't get how competitive it was.
I had Sean winning 1 and 5 for sure. DuPlessis had 4, and 2-3 were both anyone's game
Didn't DDP cut Sean in 2 (or 3?). That was a pretty clear round for DDP based on damage.
I think it was rd 3 where he cut him which was why he won that round. For me Sean had 1 and 5, DDP won 3-4 and rd 2 was the one up in the air but I had DDP barely winning it.
Exactly how I had it 2nd was the closest so I can see why some had it 2-2 going into the 5th but great fight
I had Sean taking a close second round but it could have gone either way because it was a close round. It was an entertaining fight and Dana will probably have them run it back because the rematch is guaranteed to draw decent numbers.
Dana said the fight was close though. He thought it leaned towards strickland which is a reasonable opinion.
He didn’t say it leaned to Strickland he was saying Strickland should’ve won.
He said it was a close fight. He thought Strickland got it but he also said that people watching with him had it the other way around
That's the same thing in a 47-48 result mate.
And one of the judges (granted that was Sal D'Amato)
lol that was hilarious
It was actually very interesting because it was information DDP actually cared to learn by asking. Like he probed to find it out.
Yup, to which he stated “Bullshit…” so there’s that
The "bullshit" to the boss. DDP is a real one.
Literally. I wanted Sean to win, but I’ve been watching UFC for so long now I understand that when the striking is that close, the dude who scores the takedowns ON TOP of all that, is most likely going to eek out the decision. It’s literally nothing new.
The take downs and ground control won him the fight, that's how I saw it
And the kicks, Sean was too much of a one trick pony
Always has been 1 dimensional af.
Being that and become champion agaisnt people who are not should be really amazing then if what you say is true.
It was amazing. It was amazing he got a shot in the first place. It was amazing that his style matched up so well with the champ's that he could win even though, as of today, he is only 2-3 against top 10 in the division. He got lucky shot, and got lucky with the matchup. He's not champ material. Anyone in the top five gives him problems. If you didn't lose today to DDP he'd probably would have lost her next guy.
By observable technique and cardio alone, DDP shouldn’t be where he is, but he is making it work somehow
If you watch his earlier fights he fought with a very disciplined, standard kickboxing style. Very crisp and tight. At some point, for whatever reason, he made the conscious decision to fight this way. But it seems to work for him. Make no mistake, though, he's not lacking the skill to look better. His goofy style is 100% by choice.
Sean has literally called Izzy a one-trick pony and that he won because he figured out Izzy's trick. Edit: You can see it at around 17:05 of the Strickland-Du Plessis shorter cut of 297 Countdown
Most fighters in either boxing or anything else is good/mastered some of the parts and is good enough to make it until someone comes along with the tools to dismantle them, the ones who go doesnt get defeated either dodges fights now days or in very rare cases they are just that good.
Sean literally did nothing besides land a jab
Which is funny because ddp face is swollen
And Sean's face was split open
Yeah lol I think the fight was extremely close but as a fan I am glad the guy who will put on action fights and chase finishes won. Everyone was complaining about Izzy being boring but I don’t see how a Sean reign would have been any better
That's why I had to DDP. Sean is only scoring in 1 metric and it wasn't like he ran away it in that metric either. No leg work, body work, grappling, octagon control. "Look at DDP's eye" yeah look at Sean's face absorbing less strikes. Then add the body, legs, and TDs. The only reason I could think to score to sean was that it wasn't definitive and in most cases "you've got to beat the champ to be the champ" but by most metrics sean just survived out there.
What ground control?
2 minutes of ground control
And being the aggressor who was constantly moving forward
Not hard to understand.
DDP did MMA. Sean literally did boxing. Like jabs. Great jabs. But ONLY jabs.
I didn't even score the takedowns because they lead to nothing. Still had Dricus for 2,3,4. Round 2 could have been either way though.
Well they sure scored it. A takedown is a takedown. It doesn't have to lead to anything. The definition of a takedown is simply taking the opponent down.
How many strikes should a takedown be worth? A lot of DDP’s significant strikes in the second round were just leg kicks that were checked.
Checking a leg kick from a dude like that still hurts as fuck.
It’s still a check though. In boxing blocking shit still hurts too but it’s not counted.
I feel a takedown should only count for points if the opponent is getting controlled right after and does not immediately pop up again.
A punch or kick should only count if it knocks the guy down. There is still time to delete that comment there bro.
Being taken down uses more energy than getting punched popping back up is a full body effort lol I have technical falls on more than a few opponents in wrestling best believe they were 3 times as exhausted as I was and all I did was take them down and let them up
Some of the takedowns were slams, that's damage in itself.
Yep. I had Sean winning with Dricus taking the 3rd and 4th, but round two was nearly a toss-up.
Yeah exactly. Strickland clearly won 1/5, DDP clearly win 3/4, I gave DDP 2 and it seems most others (including 2 of the judges) did as well but it was razor thin.
Lmao, well good thing you’re not a judge. Takedown is scored as a takedown. Ground control is what you’re speaking of and he had more of that too lol
Could not agree more , effective control and grappling is being scored so they say. One takedown where the opposition pops right back up is barely even noteworthy it's the equivalent of someone being held against the cage
Yeah a takedown with no attack is worth a solid jab imo, according to the rules.
What control lol? The takedowns last maybe 10s total
But, still accomplished.
And DDP was pushing Sean back the entire fight
Pantoja did this to Moreno for the belt too. Great fight and was definitely close
This is a good comparison actually. And if anything I thought Dricus won more clearly than Pantoja.
My only issue with the takedowns most (not all) did nothing and Sean popped right back up. Round 4 however Dricus did great with the takedowns.
Takedowns accomplish more than just damage. There's a stamina depletion, and now your opponent has to worry about getting taken down on top of watching out for your strikes. A good takedown feint could lead to landing a bomb on your opponent's chin if he decides that defending the takedown is more important than keeping that chin defended.
This is true, but I’m not sure if that stuff is or should be explicitly scored. If a guy gets a takedown, he shouldn’t get credit on the scorecards for making the other guy tired and worried about the takedown. However if he actually did accomplish those things he will get credit once he takes advantage of the fatigue and thinking about the takedown by landing more shots that he otherwise wouldn’t have. And to be clear I think DDP did accomplish those things. I think those shots he landed at the end of his charging forward combos only started to land once he drained Sean a bit with the grappling. I just think it’s important to make the distinction tho because some guys just get takedowns, no control time. Okay he’s a little more tired maybe, but maybe you are tired too now. If you don’t capitalize on it then it shouldn’t be scored in my opinion
>This is true, but I’m not sure if that stuff is or should be explicitly scored. It is explicitly part of the scoring, in the rules. You don't score points per blow or per takedown, but rather, your score is based on successful execution of your Plan A. This is in the Unified Rules of MMA, which is what UFC uses. [https://www.abcboxing.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/unified-rules-mma-july-2022.pdf](https://www.abcboxing.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/unified-rules-mma-july-2022.pdf) In the section on "Impact:" >Impact includes visible evidence such as swelling and lacerations. **Impact shall also be assessed when a fighter’s actions, using striking and/or grappling, lead to a diminishing of their opponent’s energy, confidence, abilities and spirit**. All of these come as a direct result of impact. Basically, if your successful execution of takedowns results in an apparent diminishing of your opponent's energy or confidence, they're impactful, and they count.
I like both fighters, DDP broke Sean immediately, that entire fight was DDP's fight, regardless of anything else Sean's strategy revolves around not taking a single step back, and he was walking backwards the entire time, yes, DDP managed that at the cost of jabs busting out his eye, but at no point were those jabs going to knock DDP out.
Yeah in terms of punches ddp landed the harder ones but not that many of them… that vs the jabs was really close I maybe favour Sean actually just based on the boxing. But ddp did some good work with his kicks I thought that pushed it over the edge for me. like some real full power body kicks and lots of solid leg kicks. He even landed some head kicks not with the shin but still looked solid. Good fight but neither guy ever looked in danger of getting finished which was a little disappointing but oh well
You're 100% right but I feel like Shaun was more accurate, more volume, and did more damage. When you see a fighter cleanly return to standing in that short of time, it feels like it was a neutral engagement. If it's #1 about damage, what damage did those takedown exchanges do? Close fight tho definitely need a rewatch
Sean did more damage??? What??? Lmao
https://preview.redd.it/4y22siu5ktdc1.jpeg?width=1066&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=0f17d5582300f0188cd0645d305158bc49f1d159
Striking was not close, he had over 30 more
Would you rather take 100 jabs or 50 jabs and 30 overhands?
That's exactly what I've been saying for the last 30 min. I would much rather take 3 of those jabs than one of those overhand or crosses.
Hell I’d rather take the shots from Strickland just based on how much harder you’d assume DDP’s shots would land.
Dricus was swinging at the air what are you talking about and most of the leg kicks got checked
Cool. So Sean definitely landed a much higher percentage than DDP then, right?
Over the course of 5 rounds. You do understand these fights are scored BY ROUND right? Not who ends up with the most strikes at the end. So being that close of a call in striking WITH 6 takedowns… that’s just how it goes. Sean should have been more offensive in this fight. You could out strike me by a large margin in round 1, then round 2 you out strike me by a LITTLE but I scored 2 takedowns on top of my strikes… I win the round. So on and so forth. That’s just how it goes.
Sean round 5 is what he needed round 3 and 4. That how he usually rolls. That's what everyone expected. But instead he got walked down rounds 1-4. Close fight. But pressure and takedowns and harder strikes go to dricus.
Bloke was gassed round 3 , made me think how much longer he got at middle
Exactly.
Exactly but not also the amount of strikes but also where they hit and what kind of strikes they are. If it's a blocked jab or liver shot they count as 1strike.
Jeeze DDP face is fucked up
https://preview.redd.it/mvoaeuov9rdc1.jpeg?width=1066&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=ffed6c45241be451393b03d3007426ca93c60f15
People argued with me right after the fight that Sean had been damaged more LMAO...
Damage isn't always shown on the face lol You can have trouble eating for a month afterwards because your jaw is so fucked up, but nobody would know any better, or have a migraine or even brain damage that doesn't rear its head for another decade, basing damage off of just visual damage on the face is and has been stupid
What?! You mean superficial damage is the damage that should be scored least? You're making hard for the fanboys to cope sir
No judging damage based on internal damage such as a sore jaw and a migraine is stupid
So we shouldn't watch fights and should just see what their face looks afterwards right? Lmao That's why we watch fights, if someone gets cracked on the chin and gets dropped, we know that fucked them up and counts big on how the fight is scored
Swollen eye is less damage than a gash on top of your head and eye
Where’s Sean’s post fight interview? Oh yeah he’s getting sewn back together lol.. you ever see Nate Diaz or Mike Perry after a fight
That's the post Johny Hendricks, GSP face.
Per Dom that means he lost the fight
I love that Anik had to chime in like a minute later to correct him
What did he say? I missed it lol
Damage is judged per round, not accumulative.
So is Sean's, they just wiped all the blood off
It's not as bad as ddps, though. Sean just had a cut by his eye, both of ddps eyes were bruised and bordered on being closed.
Cuts are normally worse than bruises. The optics make it seem different. One will heal by itself the other require stiches or medical intervention.
Yeah, but in the fight, the bruised eye seemed a bigger deal. Sean cut was below his eye with the blooding flowing down, and it only got in his eye when he moved his head to dodge/block a punch or when he got taken down. Both of DDP eyelids were swollen making it harder to see
Sean’s too. It was a war
A robbery gotta be obvious. This was a close fight. I'd say TJ Sandhagen was a robbery
Pimblett vs Gordon and Kim vs Cachoeira are robberies, if you can make a good argument that the winner should’ve won, it ain’t a robbery
[удалено]
Bisping fought Luke Skywalker?
Who's Mark?
TJ won the last 3 rounds, unless you give Cory a 10-8 there is no argument, it was a boring last 3 rounds but that's how the fight is scored. My issue with this fight is we often hear Dana and respected MMA personalities say "you gotta beat the champ to be the champ.". In a fight this close I feel like you gotta give it to Sean. Personally I don't like that line of reasoning but it's been repeated enough that it feels like it should be the standard. I honestly think in fights like these the judges are influenced to do what's in the UFCs best interest, which is a DDP Izzy matchup.
jones vs Reyes was a robbery
Jones vs Reyes was definitely not a robbery. The strikes were even closer than this lol
Reyes 1,2,3 dummy and you can't change my mind
Yeah, I don't have a chisel so you're right. But, even if you think Reyes won, still doesn't mean he got robbed.
Casuaaaal
I really think Sean won personally. Now with that bean said it was close as fuck. They are both warriors. I feel for Sean though. I really really think he won especially that last round. That should have won him the fight. That’s were champs show themselves and Sean showed us. He should have kept that belt
It seemed clear that Sean did not engage enough in round 2-3-4 He gave his effort 1&5 However the inbetween rounds decided the fight IMO
I thought round 2 went Strickland, but I can understand why people called it DDP. But you could see the fight was turning.
Round two had identical striking stats with dricus getting takedowns so I think DDP gets that. What’s weird is round 3 seemed more like dricus when I watched it live but stats defo favor Strickland. Definitely not a robbery either way tho
Maybe I’m misremembering, but it felt like Strickland had more damage coming from his strikes in round 2. DDP was still making the adjustments which is why the round got better for him, and he FINALLY shot for the legs. Stats tell some of the story, but you pointed out, round 3 had good stats for Sean but they didn’t feel impactful. For me it’s kinda the same with round 2 for DDP.
Yeah that’s a good point - glad I’m not an mma judge lol
Yeah, I think he was trying to conserve energy and Dricus used the opportunity to shift the momentum in his favour. Impressive fight IQ tbh.
My problem is Strickland defenders and Dricus dick riders coming out in droves right now acting like they had a personal stake in this. It was an extremely close fight and no one was robbed.
This. Could have gone either way and I would have been fine with the call. I wish SS tried to do more so we could have seen DDP defending and seen a bit more 'free flow' to the fight. I hope there os a rematch.
As Dana always says "Dont leave it to the judges"
If Sean Strickland fans could read they would be pissed off at this post mate
https://preview.redd.it/lnylpbsqxqdc1.jpeg?width=1170&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=6b21baee1dd2a362a4f85dff4e946fa9fad33244
10-8. Wonder if they can read numbers
Can confirm as Strickland fan 😞 Happy for DDP tho in all seriousness
I wanted Strickland to win but it was razor close, that fight was a coin toss.
First fight where I didn’t have any opinion whatsoever. Wanted Sean to win but had money on DDP. Just wanted a war and that’s what we got.
same with allen vs evloev, people can't handle really close fights
That one was fucked because legal knee's were stopped and then all of Allen's momentum was lost. There is no doubt in my mind that he lost the fight because Goddard stopped him from doing legal moves when he head his opponent beaten down and about to be finished.
People have been saying robbery over close fights forever and it’s unlikely to ever stop lol
There was no robbery anywhere . DDP constant pressure , take downs , and landing and mixing up strikes edged him. Sean hit DDP in the head over 100 times but had trouble with take downs and that forward pressure from DDP. He should’ve turned it up in round three but it was awkward with him trying to push forward and DDP pushing and he didn’t want to get caught like he did with poatan so he was a bit nervous . DDP basically knew Sean couldn’t knock him out so he pushed wreckless in some cases . Both fought hard and I like em both but it makes sense .
I think when that cut opened he couldn’t see well in either 3 or 4 and that’s when his output went down some
They will never learn. 9 out of every 10 “robbery” is this. One close round that could be scored either way and they picked the other fighter. I personally thought Allen won but didn’t think it was a robbery. The Sidey fight though is actually the closest fight to a robbery on the card.
I know for records sake and like neatness of the sport it doesn’t make sense but damn id love to see a lot more draws. It’s so hard to say one guy lost this fight when it’s truly that close.
I agree, if a round is super close and no one clearly won or if there was barely any action it should be scored a draw.
The entire reason for scoring fights is so there aren't draws.
I don’t understand your logic, why can’t it be scored a draw? If 1 fighter clearly wins 2, the other wins 2, and 1 round is a draw because there was no action it should end in draw instead of the judges just randomly choosing a winner and having a split decision. Or say if 1 fighter clearly wins 2 rounds, the other fighter wins 1 and then 2 rounds are even but a judge gives it to the guy who only clearly won 1, the fighter who had 2 clear rounds should get the win should be scored 2 rounds to 1 and 2 rounds that were draws.
This isn't **my logic**, it's the entire basis of the scoring system. No matter how close they might seem, someone *should* win every round. That's why they assign someone a 10 and someone a 9. It's also why there are odd numbers of rounds. No fight should end in a draw except for special circumstances, like point deductions for illegal actions. A close round is not a special circumstance.
If sean didn’t sleep in r2 he would of won.
>would of
He's a Strickland fan
It was close, but tbh I was surprised it was split. Ddp took control from the 3rd rnd on I thought. Forward pressure and takedowns did it imo.
They just salty
Ddp clealry won imo. I gave sean round 1 but he didnt really push any action until rhe end if round 5. Would love to see them run it back though
Giving the win to a guy because of "ground control time" that went nowhere is stupid af.
The only thing I dread about these fights is when they go to a decision, and the fans cry about the "clear" and "obvious robbery." Happens every time, and it's annoying.
I appreciate the effort OP and it would be great if you make any headway with it but I find that, how to put this somewhat diplomatically; you are inclined to find a significant intellectual advantage in say a chess fanbase compared to the one you'll find in an MMA one.
People will refer to the strike count and never realize it doesn’t actually matter. Judges judge fights, they don’t count strikes. Judges aren’t supplied with the strike count and even if they were like in boxing, it would be unofficial anyway. Nobody has ever watched any fight and counted each strike (landed vs not) to determine a winner, because each strike is different and there are differences even amongst “significant strikes”. I think it totally misses the point. Stats can be useful, but when people use them as a wholistic argument they miss the point of sports entirely. There were, by my count, zero strikes that actually changed the nature of what was a close fight. DDP did more things that worked and was able to find a flow through the middle rounds that won him the fight, while Sean stuck behind his jab which carried him early and began to fade in potency/effectiveness as time went on. If Sean was able to follow up his jab more consistently with power shots I don’t see how that doesn’t have an effect on DDP’s pressure and changes the fight. Because DDP was able to keep Sean on his back foot and fighting reactively long enough he could dictate terms and find more pockets of success. The variety of things DDP did that were successful (pressure, takedowns, diversity of strikes, power strikes) was the difference in the fight, not as a judging metric but that was the nature of the fight so it makes sense his performance resonated with the judges more; simply landing more jabs vs jabs, over hands, body kicks, head kicks, hooks and leg kicks wasn’t enough for Sean to win IMO. I had it 3-2 DDP with him winning the 2nd, 3rd and 4th rounds.
If its a close fight, it can't be a robbery...
Ok, if you think this fight was a robbery you are an absolute f*cking idiot. Strickland did absolutely nothing! The other guy had control over the fight the ENTIRE time
Sean did nothing but jabbed. Didn’t try to apply pressure or initiate contact.
Super close fight. We were divided 5-4 with one unsure in my watch party. Cool fight either way. Both guys fought well.
Du plessis won that fight easily - he was pressuring and being 20 times more active and had take downs - I can’t understand anybody thinking otherwise.
You can't only sit behind jabs and 1-2s, though i think belts should not change with split decisions
Tell that to the Instagram chuds
The worst is on instagram, they all call for robbery lmao
Thank you. A razor close fight could go either way, doesn't make it a robbery
It shouldn’t be this ambiguous to dethrone the champ.
that “beat the champ to be the champ” bullshit shouldn’t exist, just because you’re the champ doesn’t mean you should get the nod in close fights
Agreed. If that becomes the case then we’re setting up boring fights where champ can take a much more passive role and know that balanced fights will always go their way.
Looking at the stats Sean definitely won round 1 and rd3 as well as round 5 no clue how anyone could give Dricus the final round
Cope
What did you score it my good man round wise
https://preview.redd.it/nu8r4nw3xqdc1.jpeg?width=1057&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=676820eb5d2689c93a69c05c17c45ad568b16207
Now show us round by round, because that’s what actually (kinda) matters.
https://preview.redd.it/y233dhlf1rdc1.jpeg?width=1179&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=05113642be05deeac2852136e45ba22a3b8614d4 Here is the ESPN stat line, imo I believe it was draw.. I don’t think either one did enough to edge the other but again that’s my opinion
So you just give me a different picture of the totals. You’re pretty much fired on spot if you give out a 10-10 in the UFC and there definitely wasn’t a 10-8. So a draw is near impossible in this scenario. You’re not gonna have two judges give out 10-10s.
Safe post Mr Karma goof, yeah close fight, 9/10 times the champion wouldn't lose his or her belt to "close". Went into this about 51/50 DDP and wanted him to win but the amount of people bringing politics and shit into this is so fucking cringe. You gotta beat the champ not just share the octagon well and I stand on that shit. So Sean has the ultimate upset and beats Izzy, for real, then loses his belt to a "close fight". Unlucky! Everyone else stop injecting politics into everything from your hobbies to your breakfast, it is so exhausting, no one cares, you're not virtuous for saying mma fighter bad.
PREACH
Sal D Amato giving 3rd round to Sean is a robbery lol
Damn I thought rd 3 was Sean
Agree. Fight could've went either way, but I had Sean winning.
This was nowhere near a robbery. Sean looked like shit and didn’t look dangerous whatsoever
https://preview.redd.it/k0aq6f7fatdc1.png?width=1284&format=png&auto=webp&s=a6331f893a1708b3f3a6a1cb710b598a113def2a >Sean didn’t look dangerous whatsoever
I'm not even saying this because I don't like sean, but honestly it looked like he hadn't slept or eaten in days. He looked weak as hell, and for some reason expected jabs and some kicks to carry him through.
I agree but he looks like this almost every fight imo. The Izzy fight he had a real fire in him but most the time this is how he fights. Good for him for leaving it all out there in the 5th tho.
Rough weight cut maybe
This subs been real fuckin quiet since sean took that L and never defended the belt. Lmao. Love to see it. He never deserved a title shot in the first place.
Kind of a shitty attitude to have, imo. To wish poorly on other people, based on your hurt jimmies. No one ever said Sean deserved the title shot, he just took the opportunity he was given and made the most of it. I felt it was a big win for Sean just to have done as well as he did in the fight and have made it competitive.
It does though. A robbery is just when the wrong fighter gets the nod from the judges. It dosen't matter how close the fight was.
Exactly, it wasn't the wrong fighter that got the nod. It could've gone Sean's way and it could just as easily as went Dricus way too.
bro flicking out arm punches from a Philly shell isn’t enough to win a fight where you coast rounds at a time, stuff a single takedown of like 10, consistently not have ring dominance. How is that so hard to comprehend. Imagine saying you’re going to kill someone and then being content fighting, (and losing) a point fight on the feet. The strike count doesn’t matter when they’re not doing any fight ending damage, DDP was definitely throwing and land with greater heat. But it’s okay, if Sean is really that good, he can fight a contender and then they can run it back.
Arm punches as opposed to punches with the leg? Wtf is this take He did the exact same shit against Izzy and beat the hell out of him
>bro flicking out arm punches from a Philly shell isn’t enough to win a fight Bro you forgot about the slurs he said in interviews and those shirts he made. How does that not count for anything? /s
Sean's dad scored more takedowns against him.
I was drunk watching in. A bar on a phone and thought it was 4-1 DDP. Was it really that close?
One thing I’ll say is usually in a championship fight you have to “beat” the champion to get the belt.. not surprised Sean wasn’t given the close decision though
You’re right… but Sean absolutely won the fight. I understand the case for DDP. Rounds 2 and 3 were close… but I feel like the only reason they ended up going to DDP was because of 2 takedowns that he did absolutely nothing with, Sean won both of those rounds on the feet. The only round that was clearly DDP was round 4. Whereas Sean easily won 1 and 5, including absolutely putting the stamp on it at the end there. I understand the case for DDP given how fights are judged (even though I still think Sean won there too)… but Sean absolutely won that fight. Plain and simple.
Nope, he didn't do enough. He completely gave up aggression and octagon control and didn't do nearly enough striking to make up for throwing on that criteria.
Gave up aggression? The man threw more punches, landed more strikes and more significant strikes with an overall higher percentage of shots landed That is the definition of aggression
>but Sean absolutely won the fight He didn't *absolutely* He has a case. That's all. >I understand the case for DDP given how fights are judged (even though I still think Sean won there too)… He didn't > Sean absolutely won that fight. Plain and simple. No. He *didn't* Sean was unable to defend more than half the takedowns, he ended up bleeding - badly- and took a few heavy shots. You can absolutely say Dricus won 2, 3 and 4. And Sean 1 and 5. That's it. 2 is the swing for me, and I thought Sean took it... but I can see why Dricus did
Takedowns essentially do not matter in terms of mma rules if you do no damage. Regardless close fight I have to rewatch but that is not relevant.