This is a gross misrepresentation of that fight, and it's insanely inaccurate, even for someone who wears the Bisping-colored-glasses that Bisping clearly wears.Originally Posted by Michael Bisping
There are a few Bisping fans on the board who have complained about how much hate the guy gets, and I agree that much of it is waaaaay over the top. But this kind of nonsense is exactly why people come out of the woodwork to post GIFs of Pip being knocked into derp-face.
Kennedy actually outstruck him all day long. Let me repeat that: Kennedy Outstruck Bisping All Day Long.
Yes, he outgrappled him, too.
But without any doubt whatsoever--and despite giving up a significant reach/length advantage--Kennedy was the more effective striker in that bout. He landed more shots, he landed a higher percentage of shots, he landed more significant strikes; whether from distance, from the clinch, or when he'd grounded him. There were two rounds without any takedowns...Kennedy still won them.
The best round Bisping had--the only one you could possibly argue he actually won--was the second, where he was still missing twice for every ineffective jab he threw. Kennedy still landed the harder shots in that round, and again, at a much higher percentage than Pip. The best you could score that would be 10/10.
I really wish that MMA journalists had any sense of integrity and would actually research the fights that they comment on--or even watch them. It would be great if they'd actually call out fighters when they distort reality to the degree that Bisping did, but that would be far too much to ask...and fighters would probably balk at giving them interviews if that were to occur.
But this was weak, all the way around.