Valetina exposed tonight

Squintz said:
3-2 Santos even with the headbutt. Probably would’ve been 4-1 if not for the headbutt.
Click to expand...


Explain how Santos won Round 2 using the rules, since Valentina (a) outstruck her and landed the harder shots, (b) executed the only legit aub attempt, while Santos did virtually nothing with her grappling that round.

If you're gonna claim "control time" despite the above, log off, read the new unified rules, and rewatch the fight.
 
Rewarding point-fighting with zero damage is barely better than laying and praying.

When Elias Theoderou does it: “cut him, he’s so boring, he’s ruining the sport!!”

When Valentina does it: “brilliant, she controlled the entire fight, what a performance, look at the strike numbers, she speaks Spanish and does cute dances!!”
 
PunchyMcSplodo said:
Explain how Santos won Round 2 using the rules, since Valentina (a) outstruck her and landed the harder shots, (b) executed the only legit aub attempt, while Santos did virtually nothing with her grappling that round.

If you're gonna claim "control time" despite the above, log off, read the new unified rules, and rewatch the fight.
Click to expand...

Valentina landed 7 significant strikes in the second round to the 4 significant strikes of Santos. Valentina was credited with one submission attempt while Santos was credited with a reversal.

Santos's reversal is more meaningful than Shevchenko's "submission attempt" (which wasn't remotely close) because it led to Santos holding a dominant position for nearly half the round before the fight was stood up.

Immediately when the fight was stood up Shevchenko was taken down by Santos and controlled for the rest of the round.

Santos controlled Valentina for 3:40 of the 2nd round which equates to approximately 73% of the round. Valentina's 7 significant strikes means she was herself extremely inactive herself.

Do you understand now why the fighter who used their grappling to maintain a dominant position, which they held for 3/4th of a round, deserves to win a round in which they landed 3 fewer significant strikes than their opponent?

The pitter patter on the ground from Valentina was fodder for the live crowd which they ate up and it unfortunately costed Santos the round. There was plenty of pitter patter from Santos as well during the round the only difference was there was no "oohs & ahhs" from the audience. Theres a reason the UFC distinguishes between significant strikes, as in meaningful ones, and insignificant strikes.

The only fighters who win rounds based on pitter patter are champions like Valentina. She very clearly lost the first three rounds and was soundly beaten by the better fighter who will no doubt finish her in a rematch.
 
Last edited:
UFCIsNOTRigged said:
No you are the one whose speculating. We saw Santos fight for three rounds with both eyes in tact and she won all three of them on most scorecards.

The striking on the feet wasn't particularly meaningful in either direction for the first three rounds; it more or less cancelled out with a slight edge to Shevchenko.

Valentina only began having meaningful success on the feet after the clash of heads. Theres no reason to believe Santos would not have enjoyed similar success during the final two rounds had the clash of heads not occurred.
Click to expand...

There are plenty of reason imo. Val worked the wrong tactics in the opening rounds and paid for it. Once she adjusted, it was clear to me that Taila would struggle to take her down and keep her there. As fortheo pointed out: she did ground Val in rd4 but could only keep her there for 17 seconds. Do you really believe that this was all due to the orbital damage? I think it's because Val fought to disengage. And as I pointed out earlier: this was her being in a pinch. She knew she was likely in a hole and therefore needed to mind her TD defense while at the same time looking for a finish - the rematch will obviously begin quite differently.
 
Last edited:
I’m not a WMMA hater. I’m really not. But I do get a good chuckle when people try and sneak her up towards the top of the P4P list, over some of the top Male fighters. Same thing I was saying with Nunes before Pena brawled her face off. There needs to be a separate list for WMMA . Throwing the biological differences aside, she’s not more skilled than most ranked male fighters in the lower weight classes, much less the champions. Neither was Nunes. Yes, I get the dominance. I get the title reign. Don’t care…..
 
CPH said:
There are plenty of reason imo. Val worked the wrong tactics in the opening rounds and paid for it. Once she adjusted, it was clear to me that Taila would struggle to take her down and keep her there. As fortheo pointed out: she did ground Val in rd4 but could only kept her there for 17 seconds. Do you really believe that this was all due to the orbital damage? I think it's because Val fought to disengage. And as I pointed out earlier: this was her being in a pinch. She knew she was likely in a hole and therefore needed to mind her TD defense while at the same time looking for a finish - the rematch will obviously begin quite differently.
Click to expand...

You are disregarding every other time Santos took Valentina down, controlled her, and defaulting to the one instance in which Santos was not able to maintain control; likely due to having a broken orbital bone.

I'm not saying Valentina could not beat Santos in a rematch, Valentina is a very good fighter and certainly could, but based on what both fighters demonstrated yesterday Santos should have a meaningful grappling advantage and definitely has a reasonable path to victory.

I don't mind those praising Valentina its those who continue to downplay the very clear prowess of Santos. Santos very clearly won the first three rounds of the fight. The only fighters who win rounds based off of pitter patter, as they are being dominantly controlled, are popular champions like Valentina. Posters like yourself are defending Shevchenko winning based off of a round in which she landed 3 more significant strikes than Santos after being controlled for 4 minutes.

Santos should be champion.
 
No Mas said:
Her defensive grappling has always been suspect. She made up for it with physicality and decent offensive grappling (vs. Pena). Nunes and now Santos showed a good strong grappler can smother her.

Still, she should not have been in this position and just kept distance and win a striking exchange. Don't think Santos landed a meaningful strike on the feet at distance.
Click to expand...

Does Val train jiu jitsu or is she a sambo/judo player?
 
UFCIsNOTRigged said:
You are disregarding every other time Santos took Valentina down, controlled her, and defaulting to the one instance in which Santos was not able to maintain control; likely due to having a broken orbital bone.

I'm not saying Valentina could not beat Santos in a rematch, Valentina is a very good fighter and certainly could, but based on what both fighters demonstrated yesterday Santos should have a meaningful grappling advantage and definitely has a reasonable path to victory.

I don't mind those praising Valentina its those who continue to downplay the very clear prowess of Santos. Santos very clearly won the first three rounds of the fight. The only fighters who win rounds based off of pitter patter, as they are being dominantly controlled, are popular champions like Valentina. Posters like yourself are defending Shevchenko winning based off of a round in which she landed 3 more significant strikes than Santos after being controlled for 4 minutes.

Santos should be champion.
Click to expand...

Actually, I was just thinking that Santos is definitely legit and a dangerous fight for Val. Not because I consider them evenly matched and expecting another razor-close DEC when they meet again but because one mistake can result in her being submitted. I see Val as the clear favourite to win the rematch because of what I tried to explain before: if she decides to be a slippery fish, Santos' window will be very small.
 
UFCIsNOTRigged said:
You are disregarding every other time Santos took Valentina down, controlled her, and defaulting to the one instance in which Santos was not able to maintain control; likely due to having a broken orbital bone.

I'm not saying Valentina could not beat Santos in a rematch, Valentina is a very good fighter and certainly could, but based on what both fighters demonstrated yesterday Santos should have a meaningful grappling advantage and definitely has a reasonable path to victory.

I don't mind those praising Valentina its those who continue to downplay the very clear prowess of Santos. Santos very clearly won the first three rounds of the fight. The only fighters who win rounds based off of pitter patter, as they are being dominantly controlled, are popular champions like Valentina. Posters like yourself are defending Shevchenko winning based off of a round in which she landed 3 more significant strikes than Santos after being controlled for 4 minutes.

Santos should be champion.
Click to expand...
Um...Santos had one TD that she initiated in that fight. Every other time she ended up on top was from Val trying to take her down then losing position. If you think for one second that Val will do the same gameplan in the next fight (they will fight again) then you are crazy and when Val wasnt pushing the clinch Santos had nothing.

Santos should not be champ for holding a dominant position and doing nothimg with it...period.
 
UFCIsNOTRigged said:
Valentina landed 7 significant strikes in the second round to the 4 significant strikes of Santos. Valentina was credited with one submission attempt while Santos was credited with a reversal.
Click to expand...

One, a "reversal" doesn't mean shit regarding whether a round is won unless the attacks are too even to call.

You just conceded that Valentina outstruck Santos AND got the only official sub attempt.

That automatically wins her the round. Per the rules, control is absolutely irrelevant per your concession.



UFCIsNOTRigged said:
Santos's reversal is more meaningful than Shevchenko's "submission attempt" (which wasn't remotely close) because it led to Santos holding a dominant position for nearly half the round before the fight was stood up.
Click to expand...

This is absolutely wrong.

It's laughable to claim that a reversal counts more than a sub attempt (WTF?!?!), and dominant position means absolutely nothing if one fighter won the striking and effective grappling (e.g. sub attempts).


UFCIsNOTRigged said:
The pitter patter on the ground from Valentina was fodder for the live crowd which they ate up and it unfortunately costed Santos the round.
Click to expand...


If you want to bring up the pitter patter, Valentina outlanded her more than 2 to 1.

So, to sum up Round 2:

1. Valentina landed more significant strikes.

2. Valentina landed a hell of a lot more total strikes.

3. Valentina executed the only sub attempt

4. All Santos managed is control, which the rules explicitly say should be disregarded given the facts above


Valentina won Round 2 and therefore the fight.
 
I wouldn't say Val was exposed. I'd say that Santos was shown to be legit enough to hang with a dominant champ, and will most likely hold the belt one day.
 
MMAFanCal said:
Definitely, a 3-2 Santos and I thought Valentina would not lose. She did lose this fight. Even all of the MMA pros scored it 3-2 for Santos. Sherdog judges scored it 3-2 for Santos.
Click to expand...
Nice examples but the rest of the media scores will dissapoint you.
 
Teh Clint said:
I wouldn't say Val was exposed. I'd say that Santos was shown to be legit enough to hang with a dominant champ, and will most likely hold the belt one day.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Lots of folks are saying dumb shit like "Taila lost to Mara who isn't even in the UFC anymore so she sucks", but it's like they never watched the fight or her subsequent fights where she beat several specialists in their own area. She owned Gillian and Roxy on the ground along with beating the snot out of Meatball and JoJo on the feet, and along the way she also demonstrated solid takedowns and striking to grappling transitions. That's not easy to deal with, and I expected her to give Valentina a tough fight. Which she did.
 
Last edited:
fortheo said:
She did get Val down while Val was fighting that way, though, and that was after the broken orbital. You didn't see it in round 4?

Being confident about either girl in the rematch would likely be a mistake
Click to expand...

Valentina initiated nearly every grappling exchange. 1st round she clearly did. The 2nd round she thought she could head and arm and got reversed. All she has to do is not do that in the 2nd fight.
 
Adebisi said:
Rewarding point-fighting with zero damage is barely better than laying and praying.

When Elias Theoderou does it: “cut him, he’s so boring, he’s ruining the sport!!”

When Valentina does it: “brilliant, she controlled the entire fight, what a performance, look at the strike numbers, she speaks Spanish and does cute dances!!”
Click to expand...

She landed crisp combos. She landed clear strikes. Every single judge scored 4 and 5 for Valentina. The rest of the scoring is all over the place. The only divide is whether fighters should win rounds by laying on top and barely landing one single strike.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,237,938
Messages
55,526,485
Members
174,812
Latest member
paula676

Share this page

Back
Top