How I Scored Grasso vs. Shevchenko II

[IronGolem007]

First of all, in retrospect, I am okay with the draw.

Both women definitely had their moments; both women came very close to subbing the other.

Neither fighter came away the clear winner. That means Draw, in my book.

Here's how I personally broke it down:

• Round 1: Shevchenko dominated. Faster, slicker, landed more, looked like a consummate professional. Grasso looked slow, cumbersome, somewhat amateurish. 10-9, Shevchenko.
  
• Round 2: Similar to Round 1 — except Shevchenko got caught, dropped, and then Grasso hammered her. Shevchenko looked in danger of being finished, but scored a desperate takedown to take the pressure off. 10-9, Grasso. (IMO, no 10-8, due to takedown by Shevchenko.)
  
• Round 3: Total domination by Shevchenko on the ground, 4 out of 5 minutes. Very real threat of submission. 10-9, Shevchenko. (Arguably, 10-8, the closest to a 10-8 IMO.)
  
• 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.
  
• Round 5: Shades of Round 2, Shevchenko looking busier, more professional — but got caught in a very dangerous sub attempt, completely dominated (and almost finished) in the end. 10-9, Grasso.

RESULT: 48-47, Grasso​

That said, there's an argument to be made that Round 4 went to Valentina on the cut. There's also an argument to be made that Valentina won Round 3 by 10-8. So I can see why Valentina could have won, and I can also see why the fight could've been a 48-48 draw. (However, I don't see how anyone could have scored a 47-47 draw???)

Final Impressions: Valentina Shevchenko looks, by far, "more professional" in there. Her stance, her smoothness, her speed, her fluidity of movement. By contrast, Alexa Grasso, looks "club fighter" in her stance, and sluggish in her movements. However, Grasso appears to be more lethal in her punching power, and hurt Shevchenko several times.

Moreover, Shevchenko looks to be "point fighting," looking to "touch" Grasso more, score takedowns, "touch again." By contrast, Grasso seems to be wanting to hurt and finish Shevchenko from the opening bell until the last second.

More importantly (and for the second straight time in a row),Grasso began to get to Shevchenko in the later rounds. For the second consecutive time, Grasso dominated toward the end, finishing Shevchenko in the first fight, and nearly finishing her in the second fight. Grasso seems to have more staying power than Shevchenko, who starts wilting toward the latter part of the fight both times.

In the end, Shevchenko did NOT BEAT Grasso (in the same defining way, Grasso beat Shevchenko).

A draw this time is reasonable, and it is also reasonable that Grasso remains Champion.

 

[Shaolin Alan]

TL; DR

 

[gokmev]

"(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

 

[BigTruck]

Whoever is hotter

 

[BigDramaShow26]

To me a hard jab is not point fighting but otherwise I can see it.

 

[Wormwood]

 

[anuscakes]

The most important factor is damage in scoring these fights. Round 5 Valentina did more damage. During the last part of the round during the ground and pound literally 3 shots didn't hit the arm. The most damaging and most significant part of the round was the first half. If rounds are scored based on how this fight went Yan beat O'Malley.

 

[BigDramaShow26]

The most important factor is damage in scoring these fights. Round 5 Valentina did more damage. During the last part of the round during the ground and pound literally 3 shots didn't hit the arm. The most damaging and most significant part of the round was the first half. If rounds are scored based on how this fight went Yan beat O'Malley.

Yeah I'll be interested in watching rd 5 again. Grasso was almost conceding defeat while Valentina pelted her with jabs. Val was really putting on a boxing lesson for 4 minutes then the takedown came.

 

[Mohawk Banditó]

Very clear breakdown, agreed with almost all of it. Just quick math check though, 48-48 draw would only happen with a 10-10.
If you gave Val round 1 and a 10-8 round 3 you would end up with the 47-47

That said, there's an argument to be made that Round 4 went to Valentina on the cut. There's also an argument to be made that Valentina won Round 3 by 10-8. So I can see why Valentina could have won, and I can also see why the fight could've been a 48-48 draw. (However, I don't see how anyone could have scored a 47-47 draw???)

 

[IronGolem007]

Yeah I'll be interested in watching rd 5 again. Grasso was almost conceding defeat while Valentina pelted her with jabs. Val was really putting on a boxing lesson for 4 minutes then the takedown came.

It wasn't just a takedown though.

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

 

[Dbreiden83080]

It wasn't just a takedown though.

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

She was very dominant for the last 90 seconds or two minutes. The problem is that Valentina had clearly won basically three minutes of that round. I had Valentina winning the fight by one round. I was absolutely stunned with the 10 to 8 scorecard. But it is Valentina‘s responsibility because she was in control of that round, Made a technical mistake and got beat up The last 90 seconds.

 

[Dbreiden83080]

Yeah I'll be interested in watching rd 5 again. Grasso was almost conceding defeat while Valentina pelted her with jabs. Val was really putting on a boxing lesson for 4 minutes then the takedown came.

I don’t agree that she was conceding defeat. I think she was looking for that moment to land, something big, and do some damage. Ultimately she was able to do damage on the ground.

 

[AL-Tappo McSnappo]

First of all, in retrospect, I am okay with the draw.

Both women definitely had their moments; both women came very close to subbing the other.

Neither fighter came away the clear winner. That means Draw, in my book.

Here's how I personally broke it down:

• Round 1: Shevchenko dominated. Faster, slicker, landed more, looked like a consummate professional. Grasso looked slow, cumbersome, somewhat amateurish. 10-9, Shevchenko.
  
• Round 2: Similar to Round 1 — except Shevchenko got caught, dropped, and that Grasso hammered her. Shevchenko looked in danger of being finished, but scored a takedown to take the pressure off. 10-9, Grasso. (IMO, no 10-8, due to takedown by Shevchenko.)
  
• Round 3: Total domination by Shevchenko on the ground, 4 out of 5 minutes. Very real threat of submission. 10-9, Shevchenko. (Arguably, 10-8, the closest to A 10-8 IMO.)
  
• 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.
  
• Round 5: Shades of Round 2, Shevchenko looking busier, more professional — but got caught in a very dangerous sub attempt, completely dominated (and almost finished) in the end. 10-9, Grasso.

RESULT: 48-47, Grasso​

That said, there's an argument to be made that Round 4 went to Valentina on the cut. There's also an argument to be made that Valentina won Round 3 by 10-8. So I can see why Valentina could have won, and I can also see why the fight could've been a 48-48 draw. (However, I don't see how anyone could have scored a 47-47 draw???)

Final Impressions: Valentina Shevchenko looks, by far, "more professional" in there. Her stance, her smoothness, her speed, her fluidity of movement. By contrast, Alexa Grasso, looks "club fighter" in her stance, and sluggish in her movements. However, Grasso appears to be more lethal in her punching power, and hurt Shevchenko several times.

Moreover, Shevchenko looks to be "point fighting," looking to "touch" Grasso more, score takedowns, "touch again." By contrast, Grasso seems to be wanting to hurt and finish Shevchenko from the opening bell until the last second.

More importantly (and for the second straight time in a row),Grasso began to get to Shevchenko in the later rounds. For the second consecutive time, Grasso dominated toward the end, finishing Shevchenko in the first fight, and nearly finishing her in the second fight. Grasso seems to have more staying power than Shevchenko, who starts wilting toward the latter part of the fight both times.

In the end, Shevchenko did NOT BEAT Grasso (in the same defining way, Grasso beat Shevchenko).

A draw this time is reasonable, and it is also reasonable that Grasso remains Champion.

I gave it to Alexa but i am biased, that being said i thought a draw was not fair to either of those girls, they worked so hard for a win, one should have been given the victory, a draw is a such a bs decision.

 

[RockyLockridge]

It wasn't just a takedown though.

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

ok so why does that win her the round it was a 60 second interaction. in round 2 Shevchenko had 3 minutes of control time with 1 take down, she got knocked down yes, but recovered immediately.

I honestly think that second round was very very close. And the 5th i'd give to val because she did more damage and grasso only had 1 minute of control in a 4 minuite round she was losing every minuite of that round. 1345 Valentina makes perfect sense to me. If grasso won round 5 with grappling, Val won round 3 10-8 because she beat her standing and had the close sub attempt too. anyone scoring it for grasso imo is just scoring it against valentina

 

[IronGolem007]

ok so why does that win her the round it was a 60 second interaction. in round 2 Shevchenko had 3 minutes of control time with 1 take down, she got knocked down yes, but recovered immediately.

I honestly think that second round was very very close. And the 5th i'd give to val because she did more damage and grasso only had 1 minute of control in a 4 minuite round she was losing every minuite of that round. 1345 Valentina makes perfect sense to me. If grasso won round 5 with grappling, Val won round 3 10-8 because she beat her standing and had the close sub attempt too.

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.

 

[BigDramaShow26]

I don’t agree that she was conceding defeat. I think she was looking for that moment to land, something big, and do some damage. Ultimately she was able to do damage on the ground.

True maybe that's what it was, but to me if Val just continues to stand and box then Grasso continues to look lost and maybe just swings a couple desperate lefts. The takedown attempt was like a football team running out the clock and fumbling.

 

[Eternalwarriorking]

Honestly, superb analysis! I found this very difficult to score, personally, because Shev was clearly finding her range with the jab and exacerbating the damaged eye of Grasso, who was responding with worse body language as the fight continued. But even though Val seemingly adjusted on the feet, Grasso seemed to snatch 4-5 with her huge surges. I've been flip-flopping a lot on 4-5, but this is definitely the best articulation of those rounds for Grasso.

 

[RonDante]

The most important factor is damage in scoring these fights. Round 5 Valentina did more damage. During the last part of the round during the ground and pound literally 3 shots didn't hit the arm. The most damaging and most significant part of the round was the first half. If rounds are scored based on how this fight went Yan beat O'Malley.

Tell me where you read that damage is the most important scoring criteria

 

[Goodfella86]

I should be looking at a Split decision and saying, "If the scoring wasn't so fucked up, that fight would be a draw. 48-48."

Instead, some asshole scores it 47-47, and I want his fuckin head.

I actually scored it for Val, but round 4 was too close.

 

[VonSupervillain]

Scorecards aside, the ultimate result is totally fine. Like if ever a fight could be considered a draw, it's that one. It essentially just comes down to Round 4, which could easily be a draw. Valentina controlled a majority of that rounds pace and was landing first, while Grasso had the most significant brief moment with the knees. The commentary was even openly proclaiming that Valentina had won the round and Grasso needed a finish, until they were scolded in their earpieces and told to go with the opposite narrative. A draw is perfectly fine.