MMA News Forums » MMA Forums » General MMA Forum

[v3xi]

So the main arguement of how Machida won last night is that he won round 1 and round 3. Round 2 and 3 are not question marks amongst everyone on these boards so lets talk about round 1.

Fight metric has Jackon landing more total strikes in the round while the more "significant" strikes went to Machida. Breaking the strikes in round 1 even further, Page hit Machida in the head 4 times and in the body 10 times where Machida hit Rampage in the head 1 time and in the body 3 times.

How are people arguing Machida won the round of all things? Shots to the leg are the only thing that Machida did better than Rampage in that round. Page was the aggressor, Page had Machida pressed up against the cage a significant amount of time. Page landed the most damaging strike in the round (shot to the face) and hit Machida in the head+body 14 times to Machida's 4. Page had far more octagon control where he was chasing down Machida and cutting him off, pressing forward for pretty much the entire round.

Leg kicks were the only thing Machida had over Page that round. Is that enough to win the round? Well there is some major hypocrisy going on around here and I am going to point you to it right now: FightMetric: Machida vs. Shogun FightMetric Report

Winning one round (round 3) does not entitle you to winning a fight. I would say convincingly Rampage won round 1, with round 2 actually being the closest round of the three - which I still say Page won narrowly.

[Renny]

did they count those foot stomps???....

[IceCold48]

he didnt do shit ive been saying that all along id rep you if i could

[rivethead]

I think the only round that was won convincingly was the third. I gave rampage the first by a hair, I had the second dead even, and Machida clearly won the third. 29-29 in my book.

Originally Posted by Renny

did they count those foot stomps???....

If you're talking about fightmetric, I'm under the impression that they count everything. I don't always trust their numbers though.

rh

[v3xi]

Originally Posted by rivethead

I think the only round that was won convincingly was the third. I gave rampage the first by a hair, I had the second dead even, and Machida clearly won the third. 29-29 in my book.

I agree RH, it was very close and just judging a fight by fightmetric is dumb but the main arguement people have in saying Machida won round 1 was shots to the leg which my stomach hurts from laughing at. If Machida got the win by the judges there would be no uproar, no "OMG ROBBED" posts in every thread, and I would still be saying the same thing. It was a close fight and it could have went either way. I just needed to point out some hypocrisy of people on here and kind of remind posters that in a close fight there is no robbery or karma in what happened here.

[jmcpherson21]

I like this thread it makes me laugh....

[carbondioxide830]

since when does mma give out 10-10 and 9-9 rounds? sure nobody won the first two rounds convincingly, but if push comes to shove, i dont see how you couldnt give those two to rampage.

[Rise]

First two rounds were a toss up really for me neither guy dominate and could pretty much flip a coin on who won them. fights like this are just to tough to call when they have rounds like that.

I rarely like to see immediate rematches but I think one is in order here.

[Y2JUBAE]

Can anyone tell me if the fight was even any good? IF not, no rematch.

[ckauffman28]

i had rampage with round 1 machida with 3 and 2 a toss up