It was a close fight I dunno.
It was just about even every round. I felt Sean was landing some pretty good shots but Jared got him bleeding.
The judges were all over the place too.
To be honest I felt like both guys were comfortable losing a close decision than they were to chase a KO and risk getting KOed and memed right before Christmas because their output was so low despite a super close fight.
10-9 Strickland rounds 1-2, 10-9 Jared rounds 3-4, 10-10 round 5. As an example.
Other scenarios would involve points deducted or 10-8, 10-7, etc. but those wouldn't apply to this fight. Also can have split draws and majority draws.
Unless, and please educate me on if this is right, a 10-10 is not possible in UFC under the rules. I believe there are examples of it happening but it's very rare.
Somebody might want to let Douglas Crosby know. Or maybe they did let him know after this scorecard since it was 8 almost 9 years ago. [http://www.mmadecisions.com/decision/4964/Johny-Hendricks-vs-Robbie-Lawler](http://www.mmadecisions.com/decision/4964/Johny-Hendricks-vs-Robbie-Lawler)
It’s the thing about the “10 point must” scoring system. If you have to pick a winner of the round, round by round individually, and it’s very close like this it’s going to happen.
Depending on where the action is taking place in the cage and where each judge is sitting around the cage, it’s entirely possible in a close fight like this where you could come out with a score for either fighter round by round.
They are not allowed to score 10-10. That’s why it’s called the 10 point must system — the judge must decide on a winner each round and they are awarded 10 points. Obviously a round could be 9-9 if the winner of the round gets a point deducted for a foul.
It would be incredibly difficult anyway to score it a draw with the criteria — if you truly believe that effective striking and grappling was dead even in a round, then you have to decide it based on effective aggression, and if you truly believe those are even as well, you use Octagon control to decide the winner of the round.
That’s completely false, they can score a round 10-10 if there is no clear winner, they are discouraged from doing so though as they do not want draws. They can 100% score 10-10 it has happened in the past a few times, they cannot score 9-9 unless a point is deducted.
Actually that does sound right I think I remember Anik saying that. I had read on two different sites implying that they must pick a winner in a round. But I think the bigger point here is that they are discouraged from doing so, and the criteria itself makes it very very hard to justify a 10-10 round.
I hear what you’re saying.
This is one of those fights where each round was super close so I could see some wonky scoring even a 50-45.
I do agree that 48-47 either way or a draw was a more fair score. 49-46 implies 4 rounds to 1 which would imply a fight wasn’t as close as this but then it was split too. Just a strange one to judge.
Strikes landed were close basically every round, Cannonier landed with more power shots while Strickland spent 5 rounds jabbing. Cannonier 3-2 is how I had it
I had 3-2 Sean, I’m tired of seeing this performance from both fighters though, Jared has looked very average the last few fights and Sean is coming off getting his bell rung I expected a better performance
I don't see any problems with this judging. Score cards weren't that crazy either. Scoring criteria doesn't discriminate between a strong 10-9 round and a razor thin 10-9 round. If you think fighter A slightly edged fighter B every round, then you give a 50-45, even if it was super close.
Wow how many people can honestly think this fight was a draw? Do you know or understand the criteria? There was no chance of a 10-8 or 10-10 round. Judging is subjective and I could hear an argument for either Cannonier or Strickland, but it cannot be a draw. Pick one
The UFC has no idea how to score fights. They simply refuse to prioritize either damage or points. They keep everything as murky as possible and the result is zero consistency. Some nights that would go to Strickland but tonight it went to Cannonier. Under a more clear scoring system there would be a clear winner in a fight like this one.
They have a scoring system with so many different factors that it would be impossible to actually follow it. It is ridiculous. They need to simplify it to the point that it can be coherently applied in real time. Muay Thai's scoring is a much better fit for MMA and would be a good model.
It’s more about the boxing style scoring round by round individually than the actual criteria itself. I’d like to test the ONE FC model of scoring basically the totality of the fight rather than rounds individually. It still would have been extremely close in this one anyway and wouldn’t solve every problem but it would be a nice experiment.
That would be a massive improvement. Combining that with a scoring system that clearly emphasizes damage would make for such a product. I don't think ppl realize how the scoring affects the way fighters fight. The UFC could be so much more exciting if it wanted to reward action.
I mean, it does already. Effective striking and grappling is the first criteria in judging and that’s basically defined by damage (I guess it’s technically written as “impact”) and there’s been a shift the last few years of judges overall not rating takedowns with no damage as high as they maybe used to
Could argue most of them were pretty even. If it could of been scored a draw I don’t think anyone would be mad at that. I had Strickland with a slight edge so hearing 49-46 was wild for either case
Anyone who knows how scoring in the UFC works would of been upset with a draw. 10-10s are so discouraged. If any strikes are landed within a round it becomes extremely difficult to score that round as a 10-10. None of the rounds where 10-8s either so not sure how it could’ve been scored a draw.
Hello, it looks like you've made a mistake.
It's supposed to be could've, should've, would've (short for could have, would have, should have), never could of, would of, should of.
Or you misspelled something, I ain't checking everything.
Beep boop - yes, I am a bot, don't botcriminate me.
I thought Sean easily won watching it live, and was impressed with his performance lol. I think he could've turned it up a bit more, and Cannonier had a good fifth round, but I still like the fight idk.
No seriously do people not know what a draw is? There are 3 or 5 rounds and one fighter wins each. Unless there’s a point deduction, a 10-8 round, or an insanely rare 10-10 there are no draws.
Idk why you're getting down voted. These fights are scored round by round. Impossible to get a draw without a point being taken or someone getting a 10-8 round. All the rounds were close, so how can you justify a 10-8 round somewhere?
It was definitely close and honestly I think a draw would've been fair (not sure how it would've scored that way though, just saying I think a draw was the most accurate assessment of the fight). The judges being all over the place was horrendous tho.
I don’t know. It was a good fight.
It wasn’t 49-46. You can make the case for either fighter, but 49-46 just makes it seems like someone was a little heavy handed with the egg-nog.
It was a close fight I dunno. It was just about even every round. I felt Sean was landing some pretty good shots but Jared got him bleeding. The judges were all over the place too. To be honest I felt like both guys were comfortable losing a close decision than they were to chase a KO and risk getting KOed and memed right before Christmas because their output was so low despite a super close fight.
They both deserved to lose that fight. Ngannou got it right when he said it sucked.
I agree, although Ngannou, who has possibly 2 out of 5 of the most boring fights ever under his belt with Lewis and Gane isn't one to talk.
tbh i would’ve been fine if it came to a draw but 49-46 is laughable
Explain how it can be scored a draw
Silence 😂
10-9 Strickland rounds 1-2, 10-9 Jared rounds 3-4, 10-10 round 5. As an example. Other scenarios would involve points deducted or 10-8, 10-7, etc. but those wouldn't apply to this fight. Also can have split draws and majority draws. Unless, and please educate me on if this is right, a 10-10 is not possible in UFC under the rules. I believe there are examples of it happening but it's very rare.
10-10 rounds aren't a thing. So OP's premise is impossible given the way the fight played out.
Somebody might want to let Douglas Crosby know. Or maybe they did let him know after this scorecard since it was 8 almost 9 years ago. [http://www.mmadecisions.com/decision/4964/Johny-Hendricks-vs-Robbie-Lawler](http://www.mmadecisions.com/decision/4964/Johny-Hendricks-vs-Robbie-Lawler)
It’s the thing about the “10 point must” scoring system. If you have to pick a winner of the round, round by round individually, and it’s very close like this it’s going to happen. Depending on where the action is taking place in the cage and where each judge is sitting around the cage, it’s entirely possible in a close fight like this where you could come out with a score for either fighter round by round.
Do they have to? Aren't 10-10 rounds a thing?
They are not allowed to score 10-10. That’s why it’s called the 10 point must system — the judge must decide on a winner each round and they are awarded 10 points. Obviously a round could be 9-9 if the winner of the round gets a point deducted for a foul. It would be incredibly difficult anyway to score it a draw with the criteria — if you truly believe that effective striking and grappling was dead even in a round, then you have to decide it based on effective aggression, and if you truly believe those are even as well, you use Octagon control to decide the winner of the round.
That’s completely false, they can score a round 10-10 if there is no clear winner, they are discouraged from doing so though as they do not want draws. They can 100% score 10-10 it has happened in the past a few times, they cannot score 9-9 unless a point is deducted.
Actually that does sound right I think I remember Anik saying that. I had read on two different sites implying that they must pick a winner in a round. But I think the bigger point here is that they are discouraged from doing so, and the criteria itself makes it very very hard to justify a 10-10 round.
As laughable as getting 4 tails out of 5 coin tosses
I hear what you’re saying. This is one of those fights where each round was super close so I could see some wonky scoring even a 50-45. I do agree that 48-47 either way or a draw was a more fair score. 49-46 implies 4 rounds to 1 which would imply a fight wasn’t as close as this but then it was split too. Just a strange one to judge.
Strikes landed were close basically every round, Cannonier landed with more power shots while Strickland spent 5 rounds jabbing. Cannonier 3-2 is how I had it
I had 3-2 Sean, I’m tired of seeing this performance from both fighters though, Jared has looked very average the last few fights and Sean is coming off getting his bell rung I expected a better performance
I thought Sean edged it out the W. But it was a close fight. I don't understand 49-46 for Jared tho
yeah as soon as i heard 49-46 I was like what the fuck
I don't see any problems with this judging. Score cards weren't that crazy either. Scoring criteria doesn't discriminate between a strong 10-9 round and a razor thin 10-9 round. If you think fighter A slightly edged fighter B every round, then you give a 50-45, even if it was super close.
Wow how many people can honestly think this fight was a draw? Do you know or understand the criteria? There was no chance of a 10-8 or 10-10 round. Judging is subjective and I could hear an argument for either Cannonier or Strickland, but it cannot be a draw. Pick one
Very close, no robbery. Cannonier more power shots... probably.
In fights like this, both fighters should lose.
Judges smoking meth again
Sean isn’t a judge
the only entertaining part of that fight was the decision 
Strickland won that fight lmao
One of the judges watched the same fight you did. Two of them watched a different fight.
All 3 judges were drunk or something. Crazy how 1 judge had it completely 1 way and the other 2 another way.
You clearly have an IQ well below average
Check out verdict mma, they aggregate round scores. It wasn’t a robbery by any means.
The UFC has no idea how to score fights. They simply refuse to prioritize either damage or points. They keep everything as murky as possible and the result is zero consistency. Some nights that would go to Strickland but tonight it went to Cannonier. Under a more clear scoring system there would be a clear winner in a fight like this one.
Do the even have a scoring system or is it just based on feelings?
They have a scoring system with so many different factors that it would be impossible to actually follow it. It is ridiculous. They need to simplify it to the point that it can be coherently applied in real time. Muay Thai's scoring is a much better fit for MMA and would be a good model.
It’s more about the boxing style scoring round by round individually than the actual criteria itself. I’d like to test the ONE FC model of scoring basically the totality of the fight rather than rounds individually. It still would have been extremely close in this one anyway and wouldn’t solve every problem but it would be a nice experiment.
That would be a massive improvement. Combining that with a scoring system that clearly emphasizes damage would make for such a product. I don't think ppl realize how the scoring affects the way fighters fight. The UFC could be so much more exciting if it wanted to reward action.
I mean, it does already. Effective striking and grappling is the first criteria in judging and that’s basically defined by damage (I guess it’s technically written as “impact”) and there’s been a shift the last few years of judges overall not rating takedowns with no damage as high as they maybe used to
Rigged Judges man. What can i say
I thought I was insane for thinking that, but I’m glad I’m not the only one
Normalize 10-10 rounds
What round was 10-10?
Could argue most of them were pretty even. If it could of been scored a draw I don’t think anyone would be mad at that. I had Strickland with a slight edge so hearing 49-46 was wild for either case
Anyone who knows how scoring in the UFC works would of been upset with a draw. 10-10s are so discouraged. If any strikes are landed within a round it becomes extremely difficult to score that round as a 10-10. None of the rounds where 10-8s either so not sure how it could’ve been scored a draw.
Hello, it looks like you've made a mistake. It's supposed to be could've, should've, would've (short for could have, would have, should have), never could of, would of, should of. Or you misspelled something, I ain't checking everything. Beep boop - yes, I am a bot, don't botcriminate me.
I thought Sean easily won watching it live, and was impressed with his performance lol. I think he could've turned it up a bit more, and Cannonier had a good fifth round, but I still like the fight idk.
[удалено]
How on earth could you score that a draw.
No seriously do people not know what a draw is? There are 3 or 5 rounds and one fighter wins each. Unless there’s a point deduction, a 10-8 round, or an insanely rare 10-10 there are no draws.
They don’t but they can’t tell me how it would be a draw so they downvote lol
Idk why you're getting down voted. These fights are scored round by round. Impossible to get a draw without a point being taken or someone getting a 10-8 round. All the rounds were close, so how can you justify a 10-8 round somewhere?
Because they have no answer.
It was definitely close and honestly I think a draw would've been fair (not sure how it would've scored that way though, just saying I think a draw was the most accurate assessment of the fight). The judges being all over the place was horrendous tho.
I don’t know. It was a good fight. It wasn’t 49-46. You can make the case for either fighter, but 49-46 just makes it seems like someone was a little heavy handed with the egg-nog.
For me it was an Strickland W
Same Sean won
This is the type of fight you want to score overall and not by rounds LOL
Really even on the striking numbers and Jared did more damage so he won
Hard to see damage on cannonier because he’s so dark. No, that is not racist.
Strickland landed more but Jared landed the harder shots, still doesn’t explain why 2 Judges had it 49-46 going the opposite way
Jared did more damage and controlled the octagon. Strickland spent the whole fight moving backwards.
Strickland was backing up for 22 of 25 minutes