Is gsp vs Hendricks still the most controversial fight of all time ?

[suffersystem]

Nah I think we were biased by the fact that GSP's face showed more visible damage. Upon rewatch it was a 3-2 for GSP. Hendricks won his rounds by a much bigger margin but GSP did enough to keep them 10-9 and overall won more rounds.

See, I have no issue with someone giving the fight to Hendricks, or if someone gives the fight to GSP. It was a closely fought battle.

IMHO Hendricks taking the fifth round off lost him that fight.

 

[killakillakilla]

Yes, that shows you were completely wrong in your statements, thank you.

GSP wanted VADA, but Hendricks team were concerned. NSAC were running their own advanced testing, GSP also agreed to this testing and did extra above and beyond.

Quoted from the article, said by Keith Kizer, former Commissioner of the NSAC:

"I don't blame Georges for this, but Georges' people decided to start muddying the waters asking a ton of questions, some which were relevant and some that weren't," Kizer explained. "And they continued to ask questions and then finally they got to the point where they were unavailable and can't be reached in any manner for at least 10 days. It doesn't take a genius to figure out that's a 'no.' That's a 'no' by one's inactions than it is a verbal 'no' or a written 'no,' but you can read the emails yourself and make up your own mind."

GSP effectively rejected the NSAC offer for extra testing. Go read the emails. The article supports what I am saying.

 

[suffersystem]

Quoted from the article, said by Keith Kizer, former Commissioner of the NSAC:

"I don't blame Georges for this, but Georges' people decided to start muddying the waters asking a ton of questions, some which were relevant and some that weren't," Kizer explained. "And they continued to ask questions and then finally they got to the point where they were unavailable and can't be reached in any manner for at least 10 days. It doesn't take a genius to figure out that's a 'no.' That's a 'no' by one's inactions than it is a verbal 'no' or a written 'no,' but you can read the emails yourself and make up your own mind."

GSP effectively rejected the offer. Go read the emails. The article supports what I am saying.

Good lord, the final email says GSP has agreed to the extra testing by NSAC and will do his own as well. They ask to send the paperwork and invoices over for him to sign.

"We spoke with Georges today and he took his decision so for your information, Georges has decided that if Johny Hendricks does not want to do VADA and prefers your proposed enhanced steroid and drug testing by the Nevada Athletic Commission, Georges will also do it, in addition to VADA."

How is that saying no?



It should be noted as well GSP did in fact do NSAC testing and VADA testing, as he says he would.

 

[killakillakilla]

Good lord, the final email says GSP has agreed to the extra testing by NSAC and will do his own as well. They ask to send the paperwork and invoices over for him to sign.

"We spoke with Georges today and he took his decision so for your information, Georges has decided that if Johny Hendricks does not want to do VADA and prefers your proposed enhanced steroid and drug testing by the Nevada Athletic Commission, Georges will also do it, in addition to VADA."

How is that saying no?

Dude I'm not debating with you anymore about this shit that occurred almost a decade ago. Read the article. GSP accepted it after asking tons of questions and suddenly saying him and his team were "unreachable" for 10 days. They were giving the run around to Keith Kizer and he knew it, which is why it never happened. In Keith Kizer's own words, he strongly hinted that GSP was the one that effectively declined the offer.

Now I also want to make it clear that this is NOT any evidence that either GSP or Hendricks were on PEDs. There is no evidence that either of them took PEDs. This kind of back and forth is pretty regular in boxing from what I've heard.

 

[Goober stoober]

Ok I love gsp and I did score it for him but clearly I’m biased.

hendricks did more damage but his output was lacking.

Gsp had a good first round then got beat up bad in the second, ppl forget that there were 3 rounds for Hendricks to finish the job and he didn’t.

This is why draws should be more of a thing, I think this fight was very close if you judge it by rounds, I think Hendricks wins if it’s pride rules.

I think what rubbed ppl the wrong way was gsp leaving the sport right after. I speculated before that gsp did intend to come back a year later to rematch Hendricks but after danas comments he said fuck it.

he has never clamoured for a rematch and I felt this was telling of what he thought about the result.

 

[suffersystem]

Dude I'm not debating with you anymore about this shit that occurred almost a decade ago. Read the article. GSP accepted it after asking tons of questions and suddenly saying him and his team were "unreachable" for 10 days. They were giving the run around to Keith Kizer and he knew it, which is why it never happened. In Keith Kizer's own words, he strongly hinted that GSP was the one that effectively declined the offer.

Now I also want to make it clear that this is NOT any evidence that either GSP or Hendricks were on PEDs. There is no evidence that either of them took PEDs. This kind of back and forth is pretty regular in boxing from what I've heard.

Again, GSP's team was always available, the laywer himself was going to be away for ten days, and stated to have the paperwork and payments and everything sent over right away for GSP to sign.

You can't say it never happened, because it did, GSP took both the enhanced NSAC testing and VDA testing, why do you say it never happened? You dont' want to argue because you are clearly wrong.

Your last statement I agree with, neither fighter popped, so therefore neither fighter should be accused of being on PEDS. I myself never accuse Hendricks and will not accuse him

 

[killakillakilla]

Again, GSP's team was always available, the laywer himself was going to be away for ten days, and stated to have the paperwork and payments and everything sent over right away for GSP to sign.

You can't say it never happened, because it did, GSP took both the enhanced NSAC testing and VDA testing, why do you say it never happened? You dont' want to argue because you are clearly wrong.

Your last statement I agree with, neither fighter popped, so therefore neither fighter should be accused of being on PEDS. I myself never accuse Hendricks and will not accuse him

Neither GSP nor Hendricks did the extra testing proposed by the NSAC. That testing never happened as clearly explained in the article. Dude read the full article!

And seriously stop debating until you actually drop some evidence of your own. I’m the only one of us that has done so.

 

[Squarechoke]

It's not even close to being the most controversial to anyone capable of rational thought. No matter which fighter any person thought won you won't find many that didn't think it came down to the first round, which was a close one.

Compare that to a fight like, say, Phan vs Garcia and any statement that the GSP vs Hendricks decision is more controversial becomes utterly laughable.

 

[kingmob6]

I just rewatched this fight just because my memory was very foggy....I have no idea what people watched going by the discussion here.

Yes it was a razor thin fight, however, in my humble opinion George won on points. And I say this completely objectively, re-watched this with 0 bias.

Going by rounds, round 1 was razor thin, I honestly have no idea who won this round, you would have to count punches kicks etc
Round 2, I'm dumbfounded people think Hendricks had a 10-8....omg, he landed an uppercut on Georges that rocked him for all of 10 seconds, and he was definitely winning the first 2 min or so of the fight, but George recovered and actually won the rest of the round on points. I don't think people understand what a 10-8 looks like. It's hilarious.

Third round was close again, but I thought Georges won that on points as well.

Fourth round won by Hendricks, when GSP slipped and Johny got a fortuitous 2 min of ground control with some good gnp, which busted Georges up a bit...however, for some reason he just let George get up at 2 min mark, like wtf, and they continued a stand up battle, where again George probably outpointed him for the next 2-3 min. And you could clearly see that GSP was gaining steam and got his 2nd wind, while Hendricks was fading.

Fifth round was clearly Georges.

So, in my mind George won the fight, judges got it right. He clearly had more output and scored more and short bursts of good action by Hendricks weren't enough. Sherdog is crazy thinking there were 2 10-8s, lmao that is so bad.

 

[Mal Intentions]

I was at the shopping mall lately doing some grocery and I was surprised to still heard a conversation about who won between George and Johnny, the fact that people still talk about it 8 years ago just show at what point this fight was polarized. Johnny won it imo.

i remember watching it in Bru's Room and the entire place was neutral because i live in south florida and we all thought Hendricks earned a pretty clear victory

 

[Azazyah]

I remember the Machida Error

 

[Ancient Warrior]

Randleman vs Rutten was pretty controversial but I liked the outcome.

 

[NickDiaz]

Hendricks tapped anyways guys..

Pierre St George was nice enough to continue kicking his ass for the fans

 

[MMAProfessional]

arona beat fedor

Worse is Fabio Maldonado beat Fedor

 

[MMAProfessional]

I remember thinking Hendricks got robbed when I first watched. After rewatching it it was close but I gave it to GSP. I think I was so surprised he was doing to well I had him losing. Similar to Gus vs Bones 1.

 

[felmmando]

I haven't re watch this fight in a while, but I probably should. But I do remember thinking that Martin kampmann got screwed when he lost the decision against Diego

Yeah, that was clearly a robbery. St.-Pierre-Hendricks was simply close.

 

[smiles mma]

My top 4 not in any order.
Gsp vs big rig
Jones vs Gus
Jones vs Reyes
Rua vs machida

 

[Fioretti]

Every single major media site had it for Hendricks. I don't recall that ever happening for any other fight. Maybe a Leonard Garcia fight? I don't think so, though, and I certainly can't recall a higher profile fight having nearly as controversial of a decision. I mean, even GSP was shocked that he won. The crowd was booing, he lifted Johnny's arm up and whispered something to him, he looked defeated, the crowd was booing in disagreement. Pretty controversial. I've always wondered wtf he said to Hendricks, but I can't make it out. Bruce is too fuckin loud, but Johnny said "Thank you." in response:

 

[WHITE ANDERSON]

Hendricks did more damage from what I remember. There’s also a lot of evidence to support that he may have been using prohibited substances for that fight.

literally 0 evidence
just as much evidence as GSP being natty for that fight

 

[grendel824]

It always bugs me that so many people will agree on how close each round is in a fight, then at the end of the fight if the decision doesn't go the way they thought, cry robbery. Especially by the older scoring criteria, a razor close 10-9 round and a relatively dominant 10-9 round are worth the same amount of points. Somehow people fail to recognize that if they score 5 close rounds one way, that it's totally possible that someone else scored those 5 rounds the other way, let alone any mix in-between. If it matters, I'd call myself a GSP fan and I thought he lost that one (though I wasn't trying to score the rounds when I first watched it) but didn't think it was a robbery when it went the other way (And I like Hendricks a lot, too, so I wasn't really rooting AGAINST him either). Heck, a friend watching the Griffin/Rampage fight thought it was a robbery, and I didn't strongly disagree with him until I actually re-watched the fight with scoring in mind. Probably in large part due to Rampage's awesome "mean look" it felt like Forrest was holding on for dear life the whole time rather than intelligently controlling the pace and completely neutralizing Rampage (and I was a big fan of both guys - my best friend's sister even dated Rampage for a very short time). Everyone should realize that there's a difference between "I'm surprised the fight was called one way" and "it must have been fixed/was a robbery."