I am not suggesting anything, man. You're practicallly saying it, just phrasing it in another way. It seems to me that the only way you would have been pleased with Condit, would be only if he stood in front of Diaz and traded until someone got knocked out. I think you understood why I used the McCall example. If you know beforehand that it's virtually impossible to finish your opponent, there's nothing wrong with going for a points win. Diaz is one of those fighters, you can't finish the guy. I understand you were disappointed to see Condit outpoint Diaz, but it is what it is.
Anyone can play that game. This content is protected This content is protected This content is protected There was way too much of this: This content is protected C'mon, don't be scared homie. This content is protected
No, you don't understand. I don't care who won that fight. It doesn't bother me that fights go the distance. Unless it involves my kids playing outside, I hate watching someone play tag. I have no problem with the way Machida fought Jon Jones or Rashad Evans. I have a problem with the way he played tag against Tito Ortiz, and put out no effort to win the 1st two rounds of his fight with Jackson. I had no problem with the way Machida fought the 3rd round against Jackson. There is a difference in fighting intelligently and outright running away from someone.
Well, there's the small fact that Condit threw and landed more significant strikes, and did more damage. :yep Unfortunately, you don't get points for attempting to slap your opponent, or for showing frustration that your fight isn't going well and you're too one-dimensional to adjust your tactics. :good Condit won the fight. He fought tactically, but it was no Khalib Starnes or whatever the **** his name is. But Condit threw more, landed more, scored more and dictated the terms of the fight. :hat
What are you arguing? Where in this thread have I disputed the decision? I don't like the way Condit fought, plain and simple. Condit wasn't trying to win a fight, he was trying win a timed affair using a gimmick. Condit could have done so much better. This gif, that I posted earlier, shows too much of what went on: This content is protected Condit could have landed some damaging counters there, but was too committed to hauling ass. There were many more examples like this during the bout. You also act like Condit blew Diaz away in the stats. Diaz outlanded Condit 62-55 to the head, and 49-36 to the body. Condit pulled away with leg kicks. Condit out landed Diaz 68-6 in leg kicks, 50 of which were considered to be leg jabs. Leg kicks count. These kicks were not like Aldo vs Faber, or Shogun vs Machida in their first fight, but they were worth something. Still, there was no blow out here, and the "damage" you mentioned was mostly superficial. You can argue Condit won, but he did not look like the better fighter. Condit looked like he was outmatched everywhere except for speed, and he took advantage of this to win on points inside a certain time limit. You know, the let the bell save me from you sort of deal.
Were the fans boing the fight and Condit? If yes Recks is right. I love MMA, I dont want it to be booed.
Fair enough. It's all just opinion after all. :good Most of this is true. Still, I had no problem with the way Condit fought. After all, this isn't a "fight" as such, it's a fight sport. Maybe Diaz would **** Condit up on the street, but we're not looking to find out who beats whose ass on the street. Diaz knew the environment and the rules of the contest. He knew what the judges were looking for. The onus was on him to impose HIS fight plan on Condit. :good And Condit didn't run IMO. He avoided close-quarters exchanges, sure. He was quick to reclaim the centre of the octagon whenever he got pressed up against the cage. But he fought as well. He landed more power shots to the head than Diaz did (as I recall.) He threw kicks and punches and elbows with intent to hurt Diaz. And I think that afterwards, Diaz looked like he'd been in a five-round fight. :conf :hat