KRins Posted February 3, 2013 Report Share Posted February 3, 2013 I am a firm believer in never allowing the judges to make a decision because you might not like it as a fighter... but at least 1 judge clearly was watching a different fight than I did. I have no idea how any judge could possibly have scored that fight 49-46. I could easily have seen 48-47 Aldo. I could have easily seen 48-47 Edgar... but at no time EVER did Jose win 4 rounds in my mind. Discuss. EDIT: I've kinda done a mental review of the few hundred MMA and boxing matches I've watched in my lifetime. While it is clear the diversity of skills is far more engaging, I find the judging to be FARRRRRRR more controversial to borderline inept in MMA than I've ever experienced in boxing on average. Could it be that the variety of techniques in MMA lends to more... open interpretation of the bouts? Could it be the youth of mainstream MMA versus the established patterns and expectations of boxing that generate more questionable decisions? Obviously I don't personally have horses in any of these races (Except Tom Lawlor fights, he was a wrestling teammate of mine at UCF in 2004), but I find myself going "wait... wut?" a lot more often when MMA scorecards are read than a boxing scorecard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts