How I Scored Grasso vs. Shevchenko II

How big does someone's ego have to be to make your own thread with a personalized scorecard when there's several threads discussing it on the main thread. Narcissism.
 
Fair rebuttal.

I guess because "leading" for three minutes ≠ being nearly finished for two.

In the 2nd, Val was dropped and nearly finished. She "came back" with a desperate takedown, but didn't do anything with it. If anything, Val was getting worked by Alexa from the bottom.

In the 3rd, Val was dominating nearly the entire time, and was also a submission threat at one point.

In the end, because of these back-and-forth arguments, the Draw is valid.

No clear winner, and arguments to be made for both sides.

Val did not beat the Champion (in the same fashion she was finished in the first fight by the Champion).

And, at the end of the second fight, Val was just about finished for the second time.

A "draw" is accurate and the Champion deserved to retain the belt.
im fine with a a draw, but scoring it for grasso is insane imo
 
How big does someone's ego have to be to make your own thread with a personalized scorecard when there's several threads discussing it on the main thread. Narcissism.

How insecure must your punk ass be, that you "get jealous" of the fact I can make a for superior post than you could ever dream to make.

Your insecurity or my narcissism?

Probably lots of both <Lmaoo>
 
im fine with a a draw, but scoring it for grasso is insane imo

Is it really "insane" to have given Grasso 4 and 5?

Grasso had the knee sequence in 4, which was the most memorable sequence in the round, and she completely threatened/dominated Shevchenko at the end of Round 5.

Both rounds are debatable, not a clear landslide for either.

We agree that a "draw" isn't out of line
 
For me, when it comes to a bad round score or a bad scorecard in general, it’s always less egregious when the outcome of the fight itself is acceptable in spite of that score.

For instance, we’ve seen some really bad split decisions where the one guy clearly won but one judge gave the opponent the fight. It raises eyebrows and frustrates people but, at the end of the day, people are not overly annoyed by it because the right fighter still got the nod.

In this case, similarly less egregious because Grasso vs. Val could be a draw if you scored round 4 a 10-10 (never really happens but that was an ultra tight round). Or if you gave grasso round 4 but gave Val round 3 as. 10-8 (I didn’t see it that way but you’d have more of a case for it than round 5 being a 10-8 that’s for sure).

Bottom line is that Alexa retaining due to a draw seems like an acceptable outcome to me that just happens to have the stain of a really bad fifth round scorecard. But you can definitely sympathize with Shev’s disappointment because, regardless of how you or I personally saw round 4 (I have it narrowly for Alexa), that judge gave to it to Valentina and if he had scored round 5 realistically, she would have taken the fight on his scorecard and won back the belt. But he didn’t, so she didn’t.
 
Is it really "insane" to have given Grasso 4 and 5?

Grasso had the knee sequence in 4, which was the most memorable sequence in the round, and she completely threatened/dominated Shevchenko at the end of Round 5.

Both rounds are debatable, not a clear landslide for either.

We agree that a "draw" isn't out of line
No, It's not insane but a 10-8 in round 5 was because of exactly this

I just don't see how you score the 5th 10-8 and not the 3rd
 
  • Round 4: Hardest round to score. Shevchenko came across as quicker, slicker, landing more — but Grasso had that sequence of unanswered knees, and appeared to be more damaging and more dangerous. Shevchenko looks to be "point fighting," while Grasso looks to be trying to finish. 10-9, Grasso, due to the knee sequence, IMO, but Shevchenko looked busier and did score that cut.
How did the knees appear "more damaging and more dangerous" to you? Was it just because they were knees instead of punches? Because to me it didn't look like Valentina was hurt at all by them - and on the contrary, we can definitely point to Alexa being hurt by the strikes Valentina landed.
 
How did the knees appear "more damaging and more dangerous" to you? Was it just because they were knees instead of punches? Because to me it didn't look like Valentina was hurt at all by them - and on the contrary, we can definitely point to Alexa being hurt by the strikes Valentina landed.

Five unanswered knees to the skull > one elbow to the corner of the eye skin.
 
48-47 is the right score for Grasso, round 2, 4 and 5.
 
It wasn't just a takedown though.

It was a takedown + continual, very real & perpetual submission threat + utter domination to the last second.

That last sequence by Grasso was the most significant of the entire fight in terms of damage and closest to finishing the fight IMO. I've read some people downplay this, no, it was a beating that last minute or so. She really poured it on Val.
 
"(However, I don't see how anyone could have scored a 47-47 draw???)"

Here's how:

Val Grasso
10. 9
9. 10
10. 8
9. 10
9. 10
----------------
47 - 47

The scorecard I saw in my head as the first 47 was read. the 10-8 5th was unacceptable though.
 
I had the same score. 2-2 going into 5. And val punting it with the rushed head and arm TD attempt that cost her the 5th round and fight
 
I don't know why people have such a problem with the scoring. It was a very close fight overall. If you judged the whole fight as one round I'd say a draw is about right. When you can make a sound argument for both winning, I think a draw is correct and honestly draws probably should happen more in MMA. I don't know how many shitty 10-10 rounds we see but it seems every event there is a round or two across the event that neither fighter accomplish a damn thing. I'd argue there is more stalemate rounds than 10-8 rounds.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
1,237,897
Messages
55,524,612
Members
174,809
Latest member
BackagainBert
Back
Top