Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
 

Go Back   Two Plus Two Poker Forums > >

Notices

Sports Betting Discussions related to wagering on sporting events.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-05-2012, 03:21 AM   #576
SwoopAE
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
SwoopAE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 22,041
Re: MMA Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by LasFuentes View Post
Here's to a good chuckle before going to bed.

http://mmadecisions.com/decision.jsp?id=3295

Cecil and the other one gave Diaz only the 3rd (imo Condit's second best round after the 4th) while giving Condit the last who had his back taken for 1.5min of the round.
lol wow

I had rounds 3 and 4 as definitely condit, 2 as probably condit and 1/5 as probably diaz but both were close fwiw. I'd actually feel like 50-45 condit is a better score than 48-47 Diaz tbh if we're going to misscore the fight but it was a pretty clear 49-46 or 48-47 condit imo
SwoopAE is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2012, 03:25 AM   #577
LasFuentes
old hand
 
LasFuentes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: I need a rocking horse winner
Posts: 1,884
Re: MMA Thread

I really thought the decision was going to be about as 50-50 as it gets. I would have given Condit the edge personally (and I had $ on Diaz), but with the big GSP money fight and all the Diaz hype I thought it would influence the decision to a certain degree depending on the judges.
LasFuentes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2012, 03:28 AM   #578
just_mo
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Scrounging for EV
Posts: 8,699
Re: MMA Thread

LOL I cannot believe the vitriol coming from Diaz supporters about this decision. Wait a minute, yes I can. It's still comical.

HOW DARE CARLOS CONDIT EVADE HIS OPPONENT'S STRIKES! HE SHOULD STAND STILL AND TRADE WITH HIM DAMMIT CUZ LIKE THAT'S WHAT REAL FIGHTERS LIKE DIAZ DO!!!!1111!!11!

CONDIT WAS THE BETTER MAN. He landed way more strikes than Diaz. In Japanese-style, overall fight judging, there would be no question that Condit was the winner. With 10 point must, it was close but still clearly for Condit IMO.
just_mo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2012, 03:36 AM   #579
LasFuentes
old hand
 
LasFuentes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: I need a rocking horse winner
Posts: 1,884
Re: MMA Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by SwoopAE View Post
I'd actually feel like 50-45 condit is a better score than 48-47 Diaz tbh if we're going to misscore the fight but it was a pretty clear 49-46 or 48-47 condit imo
This would depend how much significance you put into having someone's back for 1.5 minutes. I think that is by far the most significant event of the entire fight, and having full back control being the most dominant position in mma. So I would find giving Condit rd5 ridiculous.
LasFuentes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2012, 03:42 AM   #580
EarlyCuyler
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: MMA Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by Army Eye View Post
I was kind of in disbelief reading the opinions on the Condit decision, but then I read back a little more and saw everybody had money on Condit. Makes sense now.
Look at the fight metric striking numbers. Condit landed significantly more strikes at a higher accuracy % in every round except #2 which was 32 to 29 strikes landed for Diaz. The totals for the fight were 151 strikes landed of 320thrown, 47% for Condit and for Diaz it was 105 of 246 for 43%. Diaz was 1 for 3 on takedowns, Condit 0 for 0. This fight was close....how?
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2012, 03:45 AM   #581
just_mo
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Scrounging for EV
Posts: 8,699
Re: MMA Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by LasFuentes View Post
This would depend how much significance you put into having someone's back for 1.5 minutes. I think that is by far the most significant event of the entire fight, and having full back control being the most dominant position in mma. So I would find giving Condit rd5 ridiculous.
I feel landing more significant strikes to your opponent's body and head is way more significant than riding someone's back and attempting two submissions that both fail without even being very threatening. So...ya I don't think giving Condit round 5 is "ridiculous" at all and FightMetric agrees, scoring it for Diaz by just 4 points, which is the smallest amount you can outscore someone and still win the round in FM scoring (3 or less diff is scored as a draw AFAIK).
just_mo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2012, 03:49 AM   #582
EarlyCuyler
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: MMA Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by LasFuentes View Post
This would depend how much significance you put into having someone's back for 1.5 minutes. I think that is by far the most significant event of the entire fight, and having full back control being the most dominant position in mma. So I would find giving Condit rd5 ridiculous.
Although he got the takedown in round 5, it led to no real threat of submission. What exactly did Diaz do with his "most dominant position in mma" when he had "full back control?" The striking in round 5 was favorable for Condit, 25 of 44 thrown 57% vs Diaz 17 of 45, 38%.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2012, 03:54 AM   #583
LasFuentes
old hand
 
LasFuentes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: I need a rocking horse winner
Posts: 1,884
Re: MMA Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by just_mo View Post
I feel landing more significant strikes to your opponent's body and head is way more significant than riding someone's back and attempting two submissions that both fail without even being very threatening. So...ya I don't think giving Condit round 5 is "ridiculous" at all and FightMetric agrees, scoring it for Diaz by just 4 points, which is the smallest amount you can outscore someone and still win the round in FM scoring (3 or less diff is scored as a draw AFAIK).
lol, so in your mind takedowns and dominant positions don't count if you get slightly outstruck on the feet in that rd.

Quote:
Originally Posted by EarlyCuyler View Post
it led to no real threat of submission
lol....
LasFuentes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2012, 03:55 AM   #584
kingofcool
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
kingofcool's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 10,662
Re: MMA Thread

please tell me people aren't calling diaz vs. Condit a robbery in this thread, like with Bisping vs. Sonnen?

I haven't read it yet, but will when i wake up. If it's just the same ******ed BS as the last time, please tell me and spare me the pain.
kingofcool is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2012, 03:58 AM   #585
just_mo
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Scrounging for EV
Posts: 8,699
Re: MMA Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by LasFuentes View Post
lol, so in your mind one takedown and a dominant position that leads to no significant offense don't count as much as getting SOUNDLY outstruck on the feet.



lol....
FYP and yeah, I do think that.

@kingofcool, naw most on this board feel Condit deserved the win, just a couple of butthurt Diaz fans griping. Fairly standard.
just_mo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2012, 04:05 AM   #586
LasFuentes
old hand
 
LasFuentes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: I need a rocking horse winner
Posts: 1,884
Re: MMA Thread

Yeah "soundly"

inigomontoya.jpeg
LasFuentes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2012, 04:20 AM   #587
Army Eye
veteran
 
Army Eye's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Foxwoods
Posts: 2,439
Re: MMA Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by EarlyCuyler View Post
Look at the fight metric striking numbers. Condit landed significantly more strikes at a higher accuracy % in every round except #2 which was 32 to 29 strikes landed for Diaz. The totals for the fight were 151 strikes landed of 320thrown, 47% for Condit and for Diaz it was 105 of 246 for 43%. Diaz was 1 for 3 on takedowns, Condit 0 for 0. This fight was close....how?
I don't care about those numbers because it is lumping all strikes together into one number, but not all strikes were created equal. A huge number of Condit's strikes were leg kicks. A leg kick, in and of itself, is basically nothing in a fight. It is a means to an end. You kick a guys leg repeatedly so he can't move as well, and his balance suffers.

And yes, the leg kicks did take their toll on Diaz. But to say a guy won a fight because he kicked his opponent in the leg is absurd. You would never say that. You work on a guy's legs, that's great, but then you have to capitalize on it, or you accomplished nothing. And Condit did to some extent. He certainly won Round 4, and you can argue Round 3 as well.

The judges who gave Condit 4-1 in rounds did an absolutely piss poor job. I don't think Round 5 needs to be discussed. Rounds 1 and 2 were only close if you don't count aggression. Aggression is not everything, no, but it IS a factor. You have to give some credit to the aggressor, as he is the one putting himself at risk, and you know, making this into a FIGHT rather than two guys standing there. If there are no other prevailing factors, then you have to give the round to the guy who was the aggressor for 5:00 out of 5:00. If you instead try to split hairs, say that the other guy landed some leg kicks, he landed a glancing backfist, then you are "doing it wrong".

To take a round away from the guy who is pressing the action every second, it's a legitimate strategy, but you have to do some actual damage! attempt to finish the fight! Condit absolutely did not do that in any combination of 3 rounds. I can give him two rounds at best.
Army Eye is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2012, 04:43 AM   #588
SwoopAE
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
SwoopAE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 22,041
Re: MMA Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by kingofcool View Post
please tell me people aren't calling diaz vs. Condit a robbery in this thread, like with Bisping vs. Sonnen?

I haven't read it yet, but will when i wake up. If it's just the same ******ed BS as the last time, please tell me and spare me the pain.
You can clearly make a case for Bisping winning rounds 1 and 2 against Sonnen, giving Diaz 3 rounds when he was outstruck over the course of the fight pretty badly is just insane. Not even close to a robbery here the only question is 48-47 or 49-46 condit (which conveniently are the two scores the judges gave out)
SwoopAE is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2012, 04:59 AM   #589
kingofcool
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
kingofcool's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 10,662
Re: MMA Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by SwoopAE View Post
You can clearly make a case for Bisping winning rounds 1 and 2 against Sonnen, giving Diaz 3 rounds when he was outstruck over the course of the fight pretty badly is just insane. Not even close to a robbery here the only question is 48-47 or 49-46 condit (which conveniently are the two scores the judges gave out)
about as much as you can for Nick in this fight. I guess it depends where you have your money, how biased you decide to be.

Going strictly by fightmetric to get a rough estimate:

The deciding round was the first in bisping vs. Sonnen (the round everyone who had Bisping winning gave to.... bisping) was scored 77-62(15 point margin) in favor of Chael.

I guess rounds 2 and 5 are considered Diaz in this fight?
Condit won round 4 big.

Round 1 and 3 was scored 68-56(12 points margin) and 61-57(4 point margin) for Condit. Give either of those to Diaz and he wins.

Now i feel Condit won this fight, no doubt. But it's not worse to cry robbery here than it was in Chael vs. Sonnen to be perfectly honest. It's quite horrible in both fights. And i lost money on the Diaz fight and is as such biased, and still would never suggest he won.
kingofcool is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2012, 05:31 AM   #590
just_mo
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Scrounging for EV
Posts: 8,699
Re: MMA Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by Army Eye View Post
I don't care about those numbers because it is lumping all strikes together into one number, but not all strikes were created equal. A huge number of Condit's strikes were leg kicks. A leg kick, in and of itself, is basically nothing in a fight. It is a means to an end. You kick a guys leg repeatedly so he can't move as well, and his balance suffers.

And yes, the leg kicks did take their toll on Diaz. But to say a guy won a fight because he kicked his opponent in the leg is absurd. You would never say that. You work on a guy's legs, that's great, but then you have to capitalize on it, or you accomplished nothing. And Condit did to some extent. He certainly won Round 4, and you can argue Round 3 as well.

The judges who gave Condit 4-1 in rounds did an absolutely piss poor job. I don't think Round 5 needs to be discussed. Rounds 1 and 2 were only close if you don't count aggression. Aggression is not everything, no, but it IS a factor. You have to give some credit to the aggressor, as he is the one putting himself at risk, and you know, making this into a FIGHT rather than two guys standing there. If there are no other prevailing factors, then you have to give the round to the guy who was the aggressor for 5:00 out of 5:00. If you instead try to split hairs, say that the other guy landed some leg kicks, he landed a glancing backfist, then you are "doing it wrong".

To take a round away from the guy who is pressing the action every second, it's a legitimate strategy, but you have to do some actual damage! attempt to finish the fight! Condit absolutely did not do that in any combination of 3 rounds. I can give him two rounds at best.
So much fail in this post I don't even know where to start.

First off, your argument is basically "leg kicks don't matter." Go watch boxing if you only want to watch punches. Leg kicks can be significant strikes, and Condit was landing some hard shots.

Your point that Diaz was "the aggressor" is actually extremely off-base. He was plodding forward into Condit's strikes. If that's your definition of "aggression" go jerk off to some Leonard Garcia fights. Condit was the one throwing the first strike very often. And if there are no "prevailing factors" the round is a 10-10.

Your next point is "you have to do some actual damage." LOL did you see their faces after the fight?! Diaz was wearing plenty of damage. Condit, very little.
just_mo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2012, 05:41 AM   #591
grumpy64
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 7,621
Re: MMA Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by Army Eye View Post
I don't care about those numbers because it is lumping all strikes together into one number, but not all strikes were created equal. A huge number of Condit's strikes were leg kicks. A leg kick, in and of itself, is basically nothing in a fight. It is a means to an end. You kick a guys leg repeatedly so he can't move as well, and his balance suffers.

And yes, the leg kicks did take their toll on Diaz. But to say a guy won a fight because he kicked his opponent in the leg is absurd. You would never say that. You work on a guy's legs, that's great, but then you have to capitalize on it, or you accomplished nothing. And Condit did to some extent. He certainly won Round 4, and you can argue Round 3 as well.

The judges who gave Condit 4-1 in rounds did an absolutely piss poor job. I don't think Round 5 needs to be discussed. Rounds 1 and 2 were only close if you don't count aggression. Aggression is not everything, no, but it IS a factor. You have to give some credit to the aggressor, as he is the one putting himself at risk, and you know, making this into a FIGHT rather than two guys standing there. If there are no other prevailing factors, then you have to give the round to the guy who was the aggressor for 5:00 out of 5:00. If you instead try to split hairs, say that the other guy landed some leg kicks, he landed a glancing backfist, then you are "doing it wrong".

To take a round away from the guy who is pressing the action every second, it's a legitimate strategy, but you have to do some actual damage! attempt to finish the fight! Condit absolutely did not do that in any combination of 3 rounds. I can give him two rounds at best.
so walking into strikes counts as effective aggression in your mind?
grumpy64 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2012, 10:58 AM   #592
Onitsuka
adept
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 742
Re: MMA Thread

I scored round 5 for diaz and round two 10-10, rest Condit.

Literally no clue how those two judges gave round 3 to diaz and the rest condit. Round 3 was his second most dominant round imo after 4.
Onitsuka is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2012, 11:14 AM   #593
birdshake
journeyman
 
birdshake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Idiot from Northern Europe
Posts: 293
Re: MMA Thread

To be fair Nick Diaz did outstrike Condit with both body and head shots, he only lost (big) on leg kicks.

I had money on Nick and I'm a fan of him as a fighter, screaming robbery is pretty stupid imo but so is saying 49-46 based on fightmetric scores.

I think it was very close, personally first two rounds could go either way, fourth was definately Condit's and Diaz should surely win the fifth after the last 1 min on the ground. If that isn't "stealing the round" I dunno what is, besides it wasn't just LnP - he actually went for subs.

I kinda feel like Condit won, not because he's the best fighter but because he's the best gameplanner. to be honest I thought he would be much more aggressive and come closer to finishing him, after talking about "can Nick Diaz take what I can dish out". Whatever Nick fought stupid and was probably way too confident he won the rounds because he was pushing the pace. No doubt who wins a real fight and not a point fight tho - if you can't finish Nick Diaz early you're probably not gonna do it at all.

Not a robbery, not a "great" fight. Smart win for Condit - to bad GSP will prolly decision his ass and the belt is only borrowed.

Grats to the people who had $$ on Condit, nice pick - hope he will go back into killmode after the GSP fight
birdshake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2012, 11:27 AM   #594
SwoopAE
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
SwoopAE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 22,041
Re: MMA Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by Onitsuka View Post
Round 3 was his second most dominant round imo after 4.
This clearly, Condits best rounds were definitely 4 then 3, it's amazing a judge can score r3 for Diaz but none of 1/2/5 (all of which individually a case can be made for even though I personally think Condit won 2 and probably 1 in addition to 3 and 4)
SwoopAE is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2012, 11:52 AM   #595
TeflonDawg
Pooh-Bah
 
TeflonDawg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: RetiredExtremelyDangerous
Posts: 5,613
Re: MMA Thread

UFC noob here.

How is octagon control defined?

It seemed like Condit executed a game plan perfectly, but it also looked like he ran away from Diaz the whole fight. How can Diaz not get credit for being the aggressor? What about significant blows? Does ducking and weaving count as octagon control, or is it because Diaz seemingly walked into a bunch of shots before Condit bobbed and weaved again?

Enlighten me plz.
TeflonDawg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2012, 12:27 PM   #596
mojodmonky
enthusiast
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 57
Re: MMA Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by Army Eye View Post
I was kind of in disbelief reading the opinions on the Condit decision, but then I read back a little more and saw everybody had money on Condit. Makes sense now.
what are you talking about?

I am a Diaz fan and had bet on Diaz and while the rounds were fairly close, I thought it was plainly obvious that Condit won the fight.
mojodmonky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2012, 01:24 PM   #597
Tatanka
newbie
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 39
Re: MMA Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by TeflonDawg View Post
UFC noob here.

How is octagon control defined?

It seemed like Condit executed a game plan perfectly, but it also looked like he ran away from Diaz the whole fight. How can Diaz not get credit for being the aggressor? What about significant blows? Does ducking and weaving count as octagon control, or is it because Diaz seemingly walked into a bunch of shots before Condit bobbed and weaved again?

Enlighten me plz.
Octagon control is defined (not actual definition) as pressing the action, dictating where the fight takes place, and controlling the center of the octagon.

If you're new, it might seem like Condit was "running away," however, it's not the case. Condit was engaging in the exchanges, clearly landing, and getting out of a bad position. Nick Diaz is a mastermind when he has someone pressed against the cage.

As far as significant strikes go, I didn't look up CompuStrike or FightMetric stats, but I do know this; Nick Diaz likes to accumulate damage by throwing 70% of his strikes at 50, 60 percent. When those all start to add up, that's when he pops you with a liver punch at 100%. On the other hand, Condit is throwing his shots with everything he has. Diaz never got a chance to accumulate and then land the devastating blow.

If I were a judge, I'd certainly take into account octagon control, however, not to the extent most casual fans would. I would look at the fight as who is implementing their game more effectively, doing more damage, and receiving less damage. If the fight was essentially a tie at the end due to damage taken and given, I would look at who was the aggressor, and give the fight to them for pressing. Condit was clearly the winner due to the amount due to the strikes landed and damage inflicted.

Take Forrest Griffin vs. Anderson Silva. Forrest Griffin was constantly pressing the action, but he happened to be fighting the best counter-striker in the game. Octagon control means nothing to me due to their contrasting styles, and the results, obviously.

I'd have to watch again, but I scored the fight last night and got this - 1st 10-10 tie, 2nd 10-9 CC, 3rd 10-9 CC, 4th 10-9 CC, 5th 10-9 Diaz. I could see how you could give the 5th a 10-10 due to the strikes and damage inflicted on the feet by CC and the back control by Diaz, but did score it 10-9 Diaz.

Sorry, a lil' long winded. Hope that helps.
Tatanka is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2012, 01:34 PM   #598
Tatanka
newbie
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 39
Re: MMA Thread

After cleaning house last night on those fights, I freerolled 8 units on Rampage against Bader at -230. Letsssgooo

Swoop - Correct me if I'm wrong, but if I go +15U on a card, and you go +12U on a card, it's not as impressive on my end, due to the amount of money were betting, correct? It's probably wrong to look at it this way, but I'm money hungry, alright?

Anybody have thoughts on the Edgar - Bendo fight?
Tatanka is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2012, 01:37 PM   #599
kingofcool
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
kingofcool's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 10,662
Re: MMA Thread

bendo will probably praise da jesus in the postfight. But im a perpetual doubter of Edgars abilities despite telling myself I never shall again after every fight.
kingofcool is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2012, 02:05 PM   #600
Tatanka
newbie
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 39
Re: MMA Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by kingofcool View Post
bendo will probably praise da jesus in the postfight. But im a perpetual doubter of Edgars abilities despite telling myself I never shall again after every fight.
I wish there was a prop bet that Bendo praises Jesus after his fight. I'd dump my life savings on that.

That's the thing with Edgar - I keep telling myself he is too small for Bendo, but size hasn't been a issue yet especially with two Gray Maynard fights. After seeing his chin, I don't think Benson's going to knock him out, nor submit him. I could see Edgar pointing him out for a five round decision.
Tatanka is offline   Reply With Quote

Reply
      

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:08 AM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2008-2020, Two Plus Two Interactive