Rewatched Paddy fight, no robbery at all.

[Sickbro69420]

This was a poor analysis. It was lazy and I assume done by a ufc bot

 

[rstringer]

Yeah and at least one of those judges is currently under investigation for being a sketchy SOB who submitted one of the worst scorecards in the history of the sport at Bellator (Stots vs. Sabatello) only to violate protocol by flying across the country and judging UFC 282 in Las Vegas without a good night's sleep beforehand. Judges are supposed to have a grace period between judging events, not hopping around the country with minimal rest and yes there are rules about that. This is aside from the fact that the judges have submitted scorecards that I do consider legitimate robberies, personally. The one that comes to mind actually involved one of these judges, too. But I digress...

Suffice it to say that I gave up on the idea that the judges (particularly certain ones) will get it right with any kind of consistency a long time ago.



Depends on the individual person's definition of robbery. I certainly wouldn't blame any person for defining it as such, nor would I hound someone like yourself who doesn't think the term applies. I don't see the point in arguing about semantics one way or another when the more crucial element is the winner of the bout, which I saw as Gordon with a fair amount of clarity in said bout. It is what it is.

Well I don't agree about the definition of the word robbery being fully subjective.

In my view a close fight by definition cannot be called robbery, especially when the fighters are separated by a handful of significant strikes.

I know you don't see it that way so let's agree to disagree.

 

[Safton]

Well I don't agree about the definition of the word robbery being fully subjective.

In my view a close fight by definition cannot be called robbery, especially when the fighters are separated by a handful of significant strikes.

I know you don't see it that way so let's agree to disagree.

Yes, and you'll have others who will say that a robbery is any fight where the victor was arbitrarily clear in their eyes or if the reported scorecards given in by the media and fans support the notion overwhelmingly that other fighter won, strike disparities notwithstanding. Just FYI, "robbery" is a term you'll see numerous different definitions for here on Sherdog and across the MMA community and some throw it out with greater zeal than others.

 

[cheesus]

I think the fight was a lot more close than what people are giving it credit for however, the result was so predictable. Every time there is a close fight between a dominant champion or a hype job contender / prospect there is always a clear unfair bias on the judging and people are getting sick of it. There is no way we are not looking at a fair balanced judging system, there is definitely some fuckery going on.

 

[MGS]

After reading all these posts and articles saying Jared was robbed I watched the fight again very carefully.

Round 1:
Jared definitely landed a few good punches but Paddy lit him up with a number of very hard leg kicks and also snuck in a few punches of his own and most of the octagon control was his.
So to me that round could have really gone either and there was no clear robbery. There was some very selective editing after the round which ONLY SHOWED Jared's strikes. Very disingenuous!

Round 2:
It looked to me that Paddy clearly took that round. He landed multiple combos , leg strikes and even had a submission attempt. Jared definitely got a few punches in as well , so again no robbery as well.

Round 3:
Both fighter's though they can cruise to the win , Jared just kept pushing Paddy to the fence and didn't do much with his take down. So again very hard to score and definitely no robbery here.

So based on this analysis , I don't understand at all why people think this was a robbery . I think this impression is invoked by Rogan's bias BS commentary and selective editing and I am not really a Paddy fan.

Well you just confirmed that eventhough Jared didn't do much in the 3rd, and only landed the takedown, Paddy did even less by getting pushed on the fence. Control my friend, it does count. That makes it 2-1 Jared. Jared wins.

 

[Peruvian Necktie]

Takedowns don’t mean anything, sub attempts do. Paddy won

 

[13Seconds]

No, the very definition of a close fight is that it is not a robbery , especially not when all three judges give it to one person.

I don't agree with your explanation.

What fight was a robbery if this wasn’t?

 

[FIghtxIQ]

After reading all these posts and articles saying Jared was robbed I watched the fight again very carefully.

Round 1:
Jared definitely landed a few good punches but Paddy lit him up with a number of very hard leg kicks and also snuck in a few punches of his own and most of the octagon control was his.
So to me that round could have really gone either and there was no clear robbery. There was some very selective editing after the round which ONLY SHOWED Jared's strikes. Very disingenuous!

Round 2:
It looked to me that Paddy clearly took that round. He landed multiple combos , leg strikes and even had a submission attempt. Jared definitely got a few punches in as well , so again no robbery as well.

Round 3:
Both fighter's though they can cruise to the win , Jared just kept pushing Paddy to the fence and didn't do much with his take down. So again very hard to score and definitely no robbery here.

So based on this analysis , I don't understand at all why people think this was a robbery . I think this impression is invoked by Rogan's bias BS commentary and selective editing and I am not really a Paddy fan.

I did the same thing just to just focus on the fight a bit better since I was watching 3 different fights at the same time when I originally watched it (2 of them were boxing fights). I thought it was a close fight then and after the rewatch it was still a close fight. I can see them giving it to Paddy because of the octagon control, aggression, and pressure. Rounds 1-2 were pretty much the same, I don't think Gordon did enough to decisively win those rounds. When rounds are that close it's always going to be the fighter controlling the center and engaging more often that will end up winning the round. 3rd round was the only real round I scored for Gordon, even though he didn't do much with his grappling/control, he didn't do much with it throughout the fight and I know UFC is more focused on damage and control/takedowns isn't scored highly anymore.

Either way I really think why most hardcore fans and media/news think it's a robbery is because of the bias against UFC hype jobs. The fighters that UFC hypes and promotes seems to trigger fans/fighters/mma media and news a lot more than other fighters. I can understand why fighters don't like the hype jobs since they probably want the UFC push that those fighters are getting, but for the fans and media/news it's weird that they tend to have the same bias as well.

 

[Kthankss]

Your first sentence of your breakdown shows you don't grasp the scoring criteria. Literally you couldn't get through 1 sentence without showing your hand.

Brother, anyone who types with spaces between full stops and the beginning of a sentence automatically lets the forum know their IQ is lower than their age.

 

[TOMFDJYEDH]

Not even close to a robbery when I watched it back

Reality is most were expecting paddy to smoke him and when that didn’t happen, thoughts quickly change
Paddy won rd1, despite the commentary constantly going on about his chin in the air

 

[theincognito]

It was close and could have gone either way; wasn't even close to a robbery.

Being easily misled by Rogan's horrible commentary and just wanting to see a popular hypetrain fail are most likely the reasons for turning it into something it wasn't.