Do people really think Usman got Robbed against Chimaev?

[Mmmmmmma1234]

Can't be a robbery if it should have been a draw.

 

[flektarn]

Not a robbery but a draw would've been fair.

 

[OldBoy91]

Was the damage that much for a 10-8? Because it looked live like Usman came back and won the next two.

I'm okay with the 10-8 in round 1. My only real contention is that Usman did more damage than Khamzat did in that round. He slammed him and injured his wrist. Feels odd to reward the guy who was hurt more with such a lopsided score.

 

[NoBiasJustMMA]

Just rewatched it sober. I really don't see how it was a split TBH. First round a clear 10-8 Chimaev. Last two rounds were close with Chimaev getting the takedowns. Usman had a decent flurry in the last round but that's about it. The defense people have it if it was 5 rounds Chimaev would have been in trouble. Guess what? It wasn't. FIghters change their strategies if it's 5 rounds so that's a dumb argument anyway. The fact that he did that to Usman was impressive to me. Timeline, sure give him Costa for a title eliminator although Costa has done nothing to earn that if he wins but I agree beating Usman moving up didn't deserve it.

No, a lot of people had it 28-28 though due to Khamzat having a 10-8 round 1 and then losing rounds 2 and 3 since he got outstruck and he didn't do anything with the takedowns he got in the last 10 minutes.

 

[CrimsonFan]

I did not think Usman won both rounds. I would have to rewatch the fight to break it down but when I watched it live I remember being very confident that Khamzat would win the decision and was surprised it was a majority decision.

Chimaev is a victim of his own hype. He's getting such a push from the UFC that people are expecting him to win these fights without a moment of struggle or resistance. It's kind of funny to watch.

 

[NoBiasJustMMA]

I did not think Usman won both rounds. I would have to rewatch the fight to break it down but when I watched it live I remember being very confident that Khamzat would win the decision and was surprised it was a majority decision.

I think 28-28 was the right score. Khamzat got clearly out struck in rounds 2 and 3 and he landed a grand total of 1 ground strike in the last 2 rounds and didn't have a submission attempt or a dominant position in either round 2 or 3.

 

[big franklin]

Just rewatched it sober. I really don't see how it was a split TBH. First round a clear 10-8 Chimaev. Last two rounds were close with Chimaev getting the takedowns. Usman had a decent flurry in the last round but that's about it. The defense people have it if it was 5 rounds Chimaev would have been in trouble. Guess what? It wasn't. FIghters change their strategies if it's 5 rounds so that's a dumb argument anyway. The fact that he did that to Usman was impressive to me. Timeline, sure give him Costa for a title eliminator although Costa has done nothing to earn that if he wins but I agree beating Usman moving up didn't deserve it.

The opinion I care most about is the opinion of the judges, who gave Khamzat the victory. Unlike a lot of MMA fans, I respect judges and have full confidence in their ability to professionally judge fights. Charlatans will tell you that the judges were 'wrong' and that Usman should have won round X... blah, blah... Same old nonsense. Take no notice of these McDonald's eaters.

I completely agree with your point about people saying 'if it was a 5 round fight then Usman woulda won'. They went into the fight knowing it was 3 rounds. There's no reason to preserve stamina for after the fight. Can't think of a stupider argument if I tried.

 

[IronGolem007]

I thought Usman won both the second and third round though they were both close. I rarely score any round a 10-8 when there's no damage, but can see the case for it here. With that in mind, anything from 29-28 Khamzat, 29-28 Usman or 28-28, which I had at the time, makes sense. I don't think scoring the fight any of the three is an egregious perspective to have.

Concur

 

[CrimsonFan]

I think 28-28 was the right score. Khamzat got clearly out struck in rounds 2 and 3 and he landed a grand total of 1 ground strike in the last 2 rounds and didn't have a submission attempt or a dominant position in either round 2 or 3.

Is it really the correct score though? When one guy completely dominated a round and then there's two rounds that follow that are extremely close and debatable that is a draw?

I think you can certainly argue a draw, but that doesn't mean it was the right score. Again I only watched it once and I don't really care either way

Certain judges gave both guys different scores the last two rounds, the only thing clear in this fight is Khamzat won round one by a landslide

 

[Safwan ibn Muattal]

29-28 Marty

Chimaev got exposed hard that night

 

[gentel]

Can't be a robbery if it should have been a draw.

It's a robbery because it should've been a draw but wasn't scored that way

I'm okay with the 10-8 in round 1. My only real contention is that Usman did more damage than Khamzat did in that round. He slammed him and injured his wrist. Feels odd to reward the guy who was hurt more with such a lopsided score.

They can only score what there's apparent evidence of, the wrist injury only came out after. It appears to have manifested in the form of reduced output in the last two rounds but it wasn't clear why that was happening until after the fight

28-28 definitely the right score imo

 

[laleggenda27]

Was it a robbery? Obviously not. But a very good case could be made for 28-28. And though I scored the first round 10-8, I don't think it's outrageous to score it 10-9 since it was almost entirely positional domination with virtually zero damage.

 

[milliniar]

A couple close rounds but No robbery

 

[Lee_]

Robbery- When one fighter dominates and the other gets the decision.

The only robbery is that we didn't get to see a trained Usman in a 5-round fight.

I seriously doubt Khamzat doesn't get crushed in the later rounds, probably in that fight and most certainly if he were trained.

 

[NoBiasJustMMA]

Is it really the correct score though? When one guy completely dominated a round and then there's two rounds that follow that are extremely close and debatable that is a draw?

I think you can certainly argue a draw, but that doesn't mean it was the right score. Again I only watched it once and I don't really care either way

Certain judges gave both guys different scores the last two rounds, the only thing clear in this fight is Khamzat won round one by a landslide

I mean now you're making a totally different arguement. Under the current scoring criteria and scoring fights round by round 28-28 was the right score IMO. Control with no damage, submission attempts or dominant position shouldn't trump being out struck and actual damage.

 

[markg171]

Khamzat won the battle that night, but Usman won the war.

10 day notice, moving up a weight class for the first time, and with no knees should've gotten Usman KO'd like it did Volk. So in hindsight he did well for the situation.

But he still lost.

 

[drew209]

should have at the least been a draw!

 

[dominion]

I think it's entirely possible the only reason khamzat didn't dominate Usman the last 2 rounds was solely because of the hand injury. Is it a coincidence he decreased aggression and refused to punch after he hurt it thrashing Usman in the 1st?

 

[NoSmilez]

I think majority of people are working on the premise that khamzat would be in big trouble if it was a 5 rounder.

Khamzat seems like a big front runner in his fights. He is really strong for the first round then he really slows down.

 

[cws80us]

The 10-8 first round talk is absurd. You don't get a 10-8 for laying on someone for 5 minutes. He did no damage, and never came close to ending the fight. Khamzat clearly won the round, but it's was not a 10-8. I actually thought Khamzat stole the 2nd round with the late TD. Not much happened in the round, so that may have been the difference. Usman I think clearly won the 3rd. So, I thought it was 29-28 Khamzat.