10-8 is absolutely fine

[Objectively Correct]

I want to preface this by saying that I had the fight 3-2 Grasso without 10-8 rounds but ...

a 10-8 can absolutely be argued for.

"Judges shall ALWAYS give a score of 10 – 8 when the judge has established that one fighter has dominated the action of the round, had duration of the domination and also impacted their opponent with either effective strikes or effective grappling maneuvers that have diminished the abilities of their opponent."

The entire last part of the fight was Grasso on Valentina raining down unanswered ground-and-pound, Valentina curling up. Additionally, Grasso came close to a finish (hot) where you could argue that Val got saved by the bell. We're all primed for judges giving way too conservative scorecards so this seems unusual to us but you can definitely argue a 10-8 it's not that farfetched.

 

[Whitestallion]

Go fuck yourself

Then Valentina gets a 10 8 also for her round

 

[Jibsta69]

If round 5 was a 10-8, then so was round 2.
The judge clearly gave that 10-8 round for a draw which is bullshit and not how fights should be scored.

 

[BROWNPRIDE]

I want to preface this by saying that I had the fight 3-2 Grasso without 10-8 rounds but ...

a 10-8 can absolutely be argued for.

"Judges shall ALWAYS give a score of 10 – 8 when the judge has established that one fighter has dominated the action of the round, had duration of the domination and also impacted their opponent with either effective strikes or effective grappling maneuvers that have diminished the abilities of their opponent."

The entire last part of the fight was Grasso on Valentina raining down unanswered ground-and-pound, Valentina curling up. Additionally, Grasso came close to a finish (hot) where you could argue that Val got saved by the bell. We're all primed for judges giving way too conservative scorecards so this seems unusual to us but you can definitely argue a 10-8 it's not that farfetched.

I agree and either way I had Grasso winning 3-2

 

[Steve Fox]

I mean, I can understand why people are riled up, in this case prolonged control positions, or near-finishes are the only things Grasso can claim for that scoring when a 10-8 usually involves significant damage and knockdowns in addition to the other two.

 

[Emjay]

The entire last part of the fight

The first half of that round should be acknowledged.

 

[LetThemBleed]

I want to preface this by saying that I had the fight 3-2 Grasso without 10-8 rounds but ...

a 10-8 can absolutely be argued for.

"Judges shall ALWAYS give a score of 10 – 8 when the judge has established that one fighter has dominated the action of the round, had duration of the domination and also impacted their opponent with either effective strikes or effective grappling maneuvers that have diminished the abilities of their opponent."

The entire last part of the fight was Grasso on Valentina raining down unanswered ground-and-pound, Valentina curling up. Additionally, Grasso came close to a finish (hot) where you could argue that Val got saved by the bell. We're all primed for judges giving way too conservative scorecards so this seems unusual to us but you can definitely argue a 10-8 it's not that farfetched.

Only way you can reach that conclusions is if Bell gave Shevchenko the 3rd 10-8, he didn't so we're left to speculate whether he's simply retarded or corrupt. The most annoying thing is that he literally won't face any consequences for this egregiously bad scorecard and we'll be having the same conversation when he fucks up/and or deliberately favors a fighter the next time up.

 

[oldschoolmmafan]

10-8 was stupid but the rightful fighter walks away with the belt.

 

[Steve Fox]

If round 5 was a 10-8, then so was round 2.
The judge clearly gave that 10-8 round for a draw which is bullshit and not how fights should be scored.

Definitely agree with round 2 being a 10-8. Grasso's round is already convincing based on the significant strikes, but with the addition of a knockdown, it solidifies it even further in her favor. Some judges could've scored it a 10-8 for Grasso because of the KD and her dominance in significant strikes.

 

[Gladiator24]

The issue with this round being a 10-8 is now it will set a precedent for future fights. Fans are gonna be asking for 10-8 rounds and then pointing to this fight as an example

 

[thegame2013]

If the judges shall, then there needs to be more consistency. However, the judges have never enforced that shall unless it's been pure dominance, such as three knockdowns.

 

[Daniel_LaRusso]

10-8 is fair. Shevchenko was dominated and was close to being put away.

 

[DS66]

You proved yourself wrong with the definition there. There was no "duration" element in that round. Valentina was actually winning the striking exchanges for the majority of the first 4 mins of the round. There really is zero argument for a 10-8 there.... And if you DO consider that a 10-8, then you would have to also consider round 3 a 10-8 in Valentina's favor, wouldn't you? She controlled Grasso for pretty much that entire round, had her back, threatened submissions.

 

[Dana's Conscience]

I'm just ready for Blanchfield to come in for her title shot and make everything in the world right again

 

[Yep]

I want to preface this by saying that I had the fight 3-2 Grasso without 10-8 rounds but ...

a 10-8 can absolutely be argued for.

"Judges shall ALWAYS give a score of 10 – 8 when the judge has established that one fighter has dominated the action of the round, had duration of the domination and also impacted their opponent with either effective strikes or effective grappling maneuvers that have diminished the abilities of their opponent."

The entire last part of the fight was Grasso on Valentina raining down unanswered ground-and-pound, Valentina curling up. Additionally, Grasso came close to a finish (hot) where you could argue that Val got saved by the bell. We're all primed for judges giving way too conservative scorecards so this seems unusual to us but you can definitely argue a 10-8 it's not that farfetched.

It’s absolutely far fetched when you don’t score the equally dominant rnd 3 that way. Had he done that you would have a point. But he didn’t so you don’t.

 

[ZCrz]

Grasso had the nicer feet 10-8s for her

 

[Sgt Smith]

Not if you're objective and understand the scoring system.

 

[LetThemBleed]

10-8 is fair. Shevchenko was dominated and was close to being put away.

Stick to Karate then lad, this is the wrong sport for you.

 

[Objectively Correct]

Saying "but then round X should have been a 10-8 as well" has nothing to do with the argument. You are probably right. But we're talking about round 5.

 

[Gamer2k4]

Grasso neither dominated the action of the round nor had duration of the domination. You need all three to get the "always" treatment.