I haven't liked either Shamar or Chris since the start....I thought Shamar won the first round...he did control the fight, even though he didn't get any takedowns or land more than a couple strikes, he did dictate exactly where the fight would take place.
I think they gave the round to Chris for preventing the takedown.
I have seen this before in other fights, where one fighter (because he is so favored) is expected to do more than he does, so they give it to the other guy.
I think both rounds could have been scored 10-10.
I thought the fight was pretty uneventful, it was somewhat entertaining, watching a wrestler try and take someone down for two rounds, while one guy does great at defending the takedown and looking busy....not much else.
Shamar was so one dimensional....trying to counter, moving back and trying a takedown from the waist.....never going for singles or changing side to side. He looked horrible.
Chris Cope did better than Shamar did in the fight, but according to the judging rules, I don't think I saw Chris winning. I gave the aggression to Chris Cope, he tried moving forward and striking a couple times, but he doesn't use his jab enough. He lunges in too much....and if Shamar was a little better with his striking, he could have taken Chris out.
Chris did take one nice counter and there were a couple more near misses where Shamar could have done damage.
Neither guy should be considered UFC worthy.
Unless the winner of the show is Ramsay, they should send the winner to SF Challengers series.