UFC 167: St Pierre vs Hendricks

[lambyUK]

See, I don't see round 1 as close at all. Takedowns were one each, and despite GSP being busier, Hendricks landed substantially more significant strikes. They are classed as significant as that's exactly what they are. The prime example of this is Jon Jones' almost fight ending elbow on Alexander Gustaffson in their 4th round. Gus was busier in this round until that blow sent him in a spin and Jones rightfully won the round because of it.

 

Rounds 1, 2 and 4 are clearly Hendricks' rounds, and then as I've mentioned round 3 is very close as well due to Hendricks getting the big takedown at the end of it. Only round 5 for me was GSP's and even then didn't really do much significant damage.

 

My problem is that of 5 rounds, the winner of the fight only won 1 round where you can definitely say he won it.

[Egg Shen]

Outside of landing some decent knees to the thigh and that hard series of elbows whilst GSP was attempting a takedown i still gave the round in 2nd viewing to GSP.

[JNLister]

My problem is that of 5 rounds, the winner of the fight only won 1 round where you can definitely say he won it.

 

Which is why the way judges currently interpret 10 point must is flawed. At the moment there's no distinction between "it was close, you could pick it either way", "one guy just slightly won" and "one guy clearly won though didn't almost finish" even though those should really be 10-10, 10-9 and 10-8 respectively.

 

The big problem with dealing dodgy decisions and "robberies" is that you're dealing with three totally different problems:

 

* points scoring doesn't work for three or five round fights because a "wrong" round verdict can a disproportionate effect;

 

* the current use of scoring doesn't distinguish between margins of victory in a round, which is the whole purpose of having points; and

 

* some judges either have inconsistent interpretation of the criteria for winning/scoring a round, or plain suck.

[wandshogun09]

Yeah, I don't really remember Hendricks landing anything too significant in round 1.

 

and then as I've mentioned round 3 is very close as well due to Hendricks getting the big takedown at the end of it.

 

Like I said, I haven't watched the fight back yet so you may well be right. But if it's the round I'm thinking of, GSP got the better of about 4 minutes of it before Hendricks scored that takedown at the end. And as far as I remember he did nothing with it, and GSP got back to his feet before the round ended. That was GSP's round with no controversy for me.

 

My problem is that of 5 rounds, the winner of the fight only won 1 round where you can definitely say he won it.

 

There's sometimes fights like that though. Doesn't mean the decision is necessarily wrong. And like I said I had Hendricks winning as well, but you don't have to win rounds clearly. You just have to win rounds. So while you or me might think Hendricks won his rounds more decisively than GSP won his round(s), it doesn't matter. If you can even make a case that GSP eeked out 3 rounds on the cards, it's conceivable that the judges saw it that way and so it's not really a robbery.

 

Look at Jones vs Gustafsson for a recent example. Jones won his big rounds more decisively with the big elbow as you say. He was closest to finishing the fight, while Gustafsson won his rounds on volume more than any one tide turning blow. I forget which rounds were whose in that fight now, but the argument could logically be made to give one of the earlier rounds to either guy, with both splitting the rest 2-2. I thought this was a little more clear for Hendricks but I'll take another look later if my daughter has me up tonight.

 

It all works out though. The rematch could be massive with the all the controversy and questions on GSP coming off this PPV.

[David]

What I mentioned earlier about St-Pierre being involved in a legal battle with his former manager being the issue is becoming more and more likely the cause of his grief;

 

The first man to professionally manage Georges St-Pierre, Stephane Patry, took to the airwaves in Canada to speculate as to the personal problems the champ referred to following his controversial split decision win over Johny Hendricks at UFC 167.

 

Here's what Patry told Quebec's 98.5 FM Sports (Translated by BE member Sweet Scientist):

 

"Do you have any idea what the personal problems that seem to have haunted him and affected his concentration during these past few weeks or days are?"

 

Patry: "The only thing that I can think of, that I know of, is that between the period where I was his manager and his current management, he had a manager for three years, a woman named Shari Spencer. It didn't end well between them. When things ended between me and Georges, we stayed good friends but it ended very badly with Shari Spencer and I know she's suing him for several million dollars. I don't know if the lawsuit is advancing against Georges and he's gonna lose it but I don't see another problem. His parents are in good health, his two sisters too and he doesn't have health problems otherwise he couldn't fight. The only thing I could see..."

 

"Georges doesn't have children?"

 

Patry: "No, he doesn't have any children either. At the moment he isn't married, he has someone in his life but that's not on this side either that's 100% sure. The only thing I can see is the lawsuit with his former manager."

 

Spencer guided GSP's career after he parted ways with Patry.

This would make more sense after what Dana said a day or so ago, as I'm sure the UFC will be all over this if they think it could be the difference between St-Pierre fighting again sooner rather than later.

[wandshogun09]

Joe Rogan thinks GSP should retire;

 

"I think Georges should retire. One of the reasons I think Georges should retire is he was on my podcast and he was talking about being abducted by aliens. I was going, 'you think you've been abducted by aliens?' He starts talking about missing time. He started talking about driving his car and all of a sudden he's at home and he has no idea [how] he got there. I think it's head kicks. That fight he had some serious memory loss (at UFC 167). I think he's taken too many shots. An interesting statistic is that Georges has taken more punches and kicks in the last three fights than any of his fights, ever. In fact, 50-percent of the shots he's taken his entire career were in the last three fights. I think he should get out. I know the UFC probably doesn't want to hear me say that. I know that could be a huge rematch. I think they should just give Johny Hendricks the belt. I think Johny Hendricks won that fight. I think there's real problems with judging and I don't think there should be a way for a guy to win a fight, but yet lose a fight."

 

EDIT - OK Dave beat me to it

[David]

I think Joe Rogan should retire. You heard half the shit he talks on that podcast? Get out now Joe, while you still can! Especially if this man is still on your tail;