UFC 181. Hendricks Vs Lawler / Pettis Vs Melendez

John_D80

Devastator wrote: »

Trying to agree with someone else's opinion does not make it your own.

Bit of advice - try watching fights in future without knowing the results and what other peoples opinions are, its much more fun!!

So you can tell someone what is and is not their own opinion? You dont see me saying that you are only jumping on the bandwagon do you?

Do you wanna actually discuss the fight without getting personal? Or would you rather carry on telling me I cant formulate my own opinion when you know SFA about me? If its the latter,jog on please.

Believe me I did not have to try very hard to see where this fight was won and lost. For once, the guy who came too fight (rightly) won and the guy who came to roll around and clinch for 5 rounds got burned.

Devastator

Davei141 wrote: »

It is pretty obvious most people wanted Lawler to win (myself included) and are now trying to do mental gymnastics to justify the result. The same crowd that were extremely pro Robbie and booed Hendricks constantly? Shocking.

Me 2, I even bet on Lawler to win but I thought I lost my money last night. I call a fight as I see it and IMO Hendricks won. At the end my thoughts were that it could have been 4-1 to Hendricks depending on how 1st round went.


I thought the crowd were more booing the attempted TDs and therefore lack of action coming from it and cheered when the fighters were moved back to the middle. Maybe just giving them benefit of the doubt I tend not to listen to carefully to crowd or commentators during a fight lol

Devastator

John_D80 wrote: »

So you can tell someone what is and is not their own opinion? You dont see me saying that you are only jumping on the bandwagon do you?

Do you wanna actually discuss the fight without getting personal? Or would you rather carry on telling me I cant formulate my own opinion when you know SFA about me? If its the latter,jog on please.

Believe me I did not have to try very hard to see where this fight was won and lost. For once, the guy who came too fight (rightly) won and the guy who came to roll around and clinch for 5 rounds got burned.

I'm not being personal, if your taking something that way then really thats your problem. I'm not here to argue I just find it laughable!

You can say whatever you want about me, I dont care. You might look pretty foolish saying I jumped on the bandwagon though because if you read back through this thread I was posting my thoughts during & after the fight

Davei141

Awkward Badger wrote: »

Its not mental gymnastics though. Its like this, if you leave a fight to be that close it can go either way. Hendricks was anti fighting in those last two rounds. And it cost him big time. At the end of the last two rounds he didn't so much take down Robbie as put himself in a position where Robbie could T-Off while Hendricks covered up. It was probably wasn't far off in round 4 to being stopped because Hendricks wasn't fighting or making much of an effort to defend himself. For me Robbie won the first and last two rounds. No mental gymnastics required.

He was winning the 4th for a long time out striking Robbie, last round it was close until Robbie started teeing off in the last minute. 4th close to being stopped? and you say no mental gymnastics required? You sure about that? 4th wasn't close to being stopped by a few ground strikes. People have re-written what happened in the last 2 rounds and that is mental gymnastics, Hendricks slowed no doubt but Lawler looked slow for the majority of the fight, a few bursts aside. But Lawler gets a pass because he looked slow while standing up and well because hes Robbie Lawler.

John_D80

Devastator wrote: »

I'm not being personal, if your taking something that way then really thats your problem.

If you can't see how, basically telling a person that they are not capable of forming their own opinions, might be taken personally, then it is you that has a problem mate. Bit disrespectful, even to a stranger.

9 times out of ten I watch the bigger fights live but this time yeah I knew the result before I saw it. So what? Doesn't change what I saw with my own two eyes. I have no particular bias towards or against either fighter either.

Mr Blobby

Stayed up and watched the whole card (which was fantastic)

I'm glad Lawler won.
Before the fight started i was rooting for Hendricks but the second he started time wasting and holding Lawler against the fence while doing absolutely nothing i was done.

I scored rounds 1,5 for Lawler and 2,3 Hendricks. I'll need to watch round 4 again because i'm not sure.

If Hendricks had actually tried to do something with his takedowns and stopped the time wasting he'd have won... But he didn't and instead his game plan consisted of sticking his head between Lawlers legs.

If you're in a Championship fight and you try to time waste in every round you deserve to lose. Seeing Lawler getting fired up at the end showed that we actually have a champion that will go 100% for 5 rounds.

Devastator

John_D80 wrote: »

If you can't see how, basically telling a person that they are not capable of forming their own opinions, might be taken personally, then it is you that has a problem mate. Bit disrespectful, even to a stranger.

9 times out of ten I watch the bigger fights live but this time yeah I knew the result before I saw it. So what? Doesn't change what I saw with my own two eyes. I have no particular bias towards or against either fighter either.

right whatever John. As I already said I'm not trying to argue with you although it doesn't seem to be reciprocal. I'll accept that you think I have a problem to finish this :rolleyes:

John_D80

Mr Blobby wrote: »

I scored rounds 1,5 for Lawler and 2,3 Hendricks. I'll need to watch round 4 again because i'm not sure.

.

You should have kept that to yourself Blobby. Apparently , according to some here, your opinion on the fourth will not be valid as you already know the result. ;-)

John_D80

Devastator wrote: »

right whatever John. As I already said I'm not trying to argue with you although it doesn't seem to be reciprocal. I'll accept that you think I have a problem to finish this :rolleyes:

How very gracious of you sir. :rolleyes:

Awkward Badger

Davei141 wrote: »

He was winning the 4th for a long time out striking Robbie, last round it was close until Robbie started teeing off in the last minute. 4th close to being stopped? and you say no mental gymnastics required? You sure about that? 4th wasn't close to being stopped by a few ground strikes. People have re-written what happened in the last 2 rounds and that is mental gymnastics, Hendricks slowed no doubt but Lawler looked slow for the majority of the fight, a few bursts aside. But Lawler gets a pass because he looked slow while standing up and well because hes Robbie Lawler.

I don't mean it would have been stopped, it was close enough to the end of the round it was never going to be stopped but it wasn't just a few ground strikes. It was Hendricks turtled up making no effort to fight while Robbie landed blows, had it continued fights have been stopped for less. I'm no expert on scoring but I'd assume ending the round on top pounding a turtled opponent who's not even defending himself counts for something. Same as if he had an arm-bar at the end of the round it was still an arm-bar even if it was never going to be stopped with the buzzer 5 seconds away.

I'm not giving Lawlor a pass, rewriting anything or using mental gymnastics. Its just my opinion of what happened. I thought Hendricks more than slowed. He went for takedown attempts and clinches to waste time and do nothing. And it cost him imo by handing the last two rounds to Robbie by letting him get the better of him in the clinches and when he took it to the ground and ending the last two rounds on top with himself doing absolutely nothing but holding on and waiting for the buzzer.

That_Guy

Had round 1, 4 and 5 for Lawler myself. Was always working when Hendricks was holding on and doing nothing.

We'll surely get the trilogy fight soon but not sure if I fancy seeing this fight again anytime soon.

Davei141

The end of the rounds were poor from Hendricks but it seems like the end of the round seems to be negating what happened before it. In round 5 i would agree as it was a decisive end from Robbie but round 4 noway. Hendricks was being stupid in parts but surely a round should be judged overall?

Most of the comments in favour of Lawler don't say he deserved to win because he was the better fighter or performed better than Hendricks, that he out struck Hendricks or controlled the fight, they say it is because Hendricks stalled and/or gassed.

I don't want to see that fight again anytime soon either. ^

That_Guy

I do believe that judges shouldn't even be in the venue whilst scoring fights. They can be swayed far too easily by crowd noise. I know I would be as I'm only human.

I would rather judges were in an alternative venue watching the fights with no sound whatsoever.

It wouldn't completely eradicate questionable decisions but it may go some way to having fewer controversies.

I don't feel that last night's decision was questionable rather than one judge scoring 4 rounds for Lawler which I just can't even make a case for.

Stuxnet

You cant keep a belt with your head buried inside a guys crotch for 3 rounds, well done Robbie

mailburner

when I heard 49/46 I'd have put the house on hendricks

I'm so shocked and so happy right now
best xmas present I couldve wished for

ASOT

Rivera said he will be appealing the loss to Uriah and try get it turned over to a no contest, wouldn't mind seeing a rematch I taught he done really well in the first round.

Cyber Ghost

For once Hendricks isn't whining and making his excuses

http://mmajunkie.com/2014/12/ex-champ-johny-hendricks-on-ufc-181-title-loss-i-didnt-fight

I guess he's heeded all the backlash against his bullsh!t

That said, I think it would be unfair not to give him an instant rematch.

ASOT

Cyber Ghost wrote: »

For once Hendricks isn't whining and making his excuses

http://mmajunkie.com/2014/12/ex-champ-johny-hendricks-on-ufc-181-title-loss-i-didnt-fight

I guess he's heeded all the backlash against his bullsh!t

That said, I think it would be unfair not to give him an instant rematch.

Yeah he seemed calm enough about it at the presser, he knows its his own fault. Hopefully he does get a rematch it would be pretty unfair if he didnt, But Rory will be snapping id say since he was promised the next shot.

Cyber Ghost

ASOT wrote: »

Yeah he seemed calm enough about it at the presser, he knows its his own fault. Hopefully he does get a rematch it would be pretty unfair if he didnt, But Rory will be snapping id say since he was promised the next shot.

Yeah but Rory knows Dana is always likely to change his mind based on results/potential revenue.

I think Rory Mac beats either of those two easily based on last night.

scudzilla

Cyber Ghost wrote: »

That said, I think it would be unfair not to give him an instant rematch.

ASOT wrote: »

Hopefully he does get a rematch it would be pretty unfair if he didnt.

I hate all this bollox of when a champion loses he should get an instant rematch, no he shouldn't, it's Rory's turn next, Hendricks should fight someone else and then if he wins he gets a rematch

SureYWouldntYa

scudzilla wrote: »

I hate all this bollox of when a champion loses he should get an instant rematch, no he shouldn't, it's Rory's turn next, Hendricks should fight someone else and then if he wins he gets a rematch

it's not just because he was the champion, it was, to some people, a debatable decision, that's why he'll probably get a rematch straight away

Mr Blobby

He doesn't deserve a rematch.
Rory should get it way before him.

ASOT

scudzilla wrote: »

I hate all this bollox of when a champion loses he should get an instant rematch, no he shouldn't, it's Rory's turn next, Hendricks should fight someone else and then if he wins he gets a rematch

Grand just quote half my post and leave out the part about Rory. The only reason he should get a rematch imo is because Lawler didnt clearly win the fight, and whenever theres doubts like that is fairly reasonable to expect a rematch. Either way I dont see it happening because Hendricks isnt complaining.

EuskalHerria

Rory gets the next shot, beats Lawler and GSP returns. Turn the UFC into a soap.

weemcd

I don't need to see lawler v hendricks again just now. It can do for a while.

I wouldn't count on rory winning the belt either. Lawler beat him before and both have improved, interested to see how this goes 5rds

CurryFlavoured

I thought it was a dodgy decision. Lawler had flurries but Hendricks controlled most of it, whether he was boring and defensive or whatever I thought he won. I don't want to see an immediate trilogy, Lawler vs Rory and I fancy Rory.

Cyber Ghost

CurryFlavoured wrote: »

I fancy Rory.

ghey

CurryFlavoured

I also think he'd win the fight. No bias.

Mellor

Davei141 wrote: »

Apologies. After watching that round again it is easy to use stats to skew how a round went, Hendricks won that round with the better strikes IMO and Lawler would have got his stats up with a lot of strikes at the very end when Hendricks was going for the TD, Hendricks Won 4+ minutes of that round..

I'm not using the stats to skew anything. I scored rd4 for Johnny. I also think Johny did more in that round. I'm just pointing out the stat, as it's relevant information.

I think it goes without saying that Lawlor's volume mostly came at the end. All strikes aren't equal, but it's also hard to make a case for anyone dominating a rd when they are out struck like that.

threeball

Terrible decision. Lawler was on fire at the beginning of the first and end of the last, apart from that Hendricks schooled him. I lost track of how many times he caught him with the left, right low kick combination but it was at least 15 probably closer to 20 times. Yes Hendricks offensive wrestilng was shocking but he still got takedowns in every round on top of having way more strikes so I can,t see how the hell the judges came up with that one.

califano

I will post my views on this in due course.

Awkward Badger

califano wrote: »

I will post my views on this in due course.

Thank you oh wise one...

Davei141

Mellor wrote: »

I'm not using the stats to skew anything. I scored rd4 for Johnny. I also think Johny did more in that round. I'm just pointing out the stat, as it's relevant information.

I think it goes without saying that Lawlor's volume mostly came at the end. All strikes aren't equal, but it's also hard to make a case for anyone dominating a rd when they are out struck like that.

I've watched round 4 a few times and it wasn't a domination but Hendricks was definitely the better fighter for about 4.30 minutes of that fight. Landed the better strikes, controlled the fight and should have been given the round.

Watching the whole fight it was pretty clear to me that Hendricks was the better fighter, mixed up his striking with good combos and leg kicks while Lawler looked quite poor for the vast majority of the fight. It seems Hendricks actually lost points for getting a takedown too in peoples eyes. I wonder was there anyone on this thread who said they had Lawler winning it before the decision was read out.

Mr Blobby

Davei141 wrote: »

It seems Hendricks actually lost points for getting a takedown too in peoples eyes.

Problem is he done nothing with them!

Lawler actually outstruck him 26-1 on the ground!.
Hendricks had no submission attempts, No attempts to pass guard, Literally 1 strike landed.

He was doing it to waste time and imo cost him the fight.
I'm actually glad he lost... Can't stand time wasting in Championship fights.

mdwexford

Just watched the fight. I was up for Lawler but waiting for the decision I was coming on here to say how disappointed I was with his performance. Only taking it to Hendricks at the very start and very end and fighting with no urgency cost him his chance. I was gobsmacked when they announced him as champion.

I'm not a Hendricks hater but I didn't like his tactics in this fight once he knew he was ahead (or so he thought) but either way he clearly won this fight imo.

The first fight was so much better, was really looking forward to this but Robbie was very poor and if Hendricks had kept throwing combos or actually used his takedowns to do some damage he wins easily.

Very strange fight.

Disappointed the other title fight didn't last longer but that was a slick sub from Pettis. Can't see anyone troubling him for a long time.

Mellor

Just read that Lawlor winning yesterday was the first time that the belt has changed hands by split decision. :eek:
Vest surprised by that, but struggling to think of somebody else who has

Mr. CooL ICE

I thought Bendo Frankie, but first was a UD and second was SD. Interesting.

MagicIRL

Thought Hendricks had won it. He looked very impressive in the stand-up, and as he saw Robbie fade he went to control him with his wrestling which apparently is a bad thing now.

I'm not sure how fights are scored, I always thought you gained points for controlling your opponent, and that's why takedowns etc. were so important.

Thought Lawler was very slow after his opening burst, perhaps he injured himself or something. The re-re-match should be interesting.

ASOT

MagicIRL wrote: »

Thought Hendricks had won it. He looked very impressive in the stand-up, and as he saw Robbie fade he went to control him with his wrestling which apparently is a bad thing now.

I'm not sure how fights are scored, I always thought you gained points for controlling your opponent, and that's why takedowns etc. were so important.

Thought Lawler was very slow after his opening burst, perhaps he injured himself or something. The re-re-match should be interesting.

Shhh your not allowed talk about that apparently, people dont seem to like it.

MagicIRL

ASOT wrote: »

Shhh your not allowed talk about that apparently, people dont seem to like it.

People are hypocrites. They'll all watch the fight. Same way people will watch CM Punk fight.

Mellor

MagicIRL wrote: »

I'm not sure how fights are scored, I always thought you gained points for controlling your opponent, and that's why takedowns etc. were so important.
.

He wasn't really completing those final takedowns. Holding a single, but not able to put Lawlor on his back.

MrStuffins

This is the fight I was looking forward to most all year. Lawler is a proper old school legend and I was really rooting for him to take the best.

But I had the fight scored for Hendricks. I had him winning rounds 1-4. He won at least 3 of the rounds anyway! Delighted Robbie won the belt, but not at the manner in which he did so! This is the second time Hendricks has been screwed over by dodgy judges.

Devastator

Watched the fight again last night and my initial thoughts when watching it live remain the same, Hendricks won it.

Mr. CooL ICE

I reckon that even the judges got annoyed with Hendricks' tactics and let it (and the boos) influence their decision making. But 49-46? Just... no.

Controversial as it is, I'm still delighted for Robbie.

Devastator

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/othersports/ufc/11279360/UFC-181-14-things-we-learnt-from-Lawler-Hendricks-judging-and-CM-Punk.html

UFC 181 taught fans of mixed martial arts several things:

1. Sometimes, an MMA fight is not quantifiable by the 10-point must system.

2. The Johny Hendricks and Robbie Lawler fight was very hard to score, and their styles created difficulties separating them at times.

3. The 49-46 score from judge Glenn Trowbridge did not make a lot of sense. For the record, I scored it 48-47 Hendricks, identical to judge Sal D'Amato. I reckon D'Amato is one of the best in the business.

4. Watching it for a second time, with no volume on, Hendricks-Lawler was just as difficult to score. Rounds one and five were clearly Lawler's, round three Hendricks won. But for me, round two went to Hendricks, and possibly round four. You could see round round going either way. Fightmetric had Hendricks up 23-19 in significant strikes in that fourth round.



5. FightMetric, overall in terms of performance under the 10-point must system, scored the bout a draw, 48-48. But on its points scoring system, Hendricks took the fight 487-455.
6. Referee Herb Dean thought Hendricks had won the fight. He was raising his arm when the third score was being read out.
7. There will have to be a trilogy Lawler-Hendricks fight.
8. Robbie Lawler's popularity as a man and as a fighter lessened the outrage and controversy from the fight.
9. Peculiarly, Hendricks's wrestling may have worked against him in this second encounter with Lawler. He succeeded in five of 17 takedown attempts, but his head-down work on Lawler, against the Octagon wall, was not pretty in the slightest. Lawler got some work done with fists and elbows in that grind. Visually, it may have cost Hendricks the title.
10. Anthony Pettis is special. Gil Melendez got the grind right in the opening round, but Pettis only needed one opportunity. To be so slick on the ground and have such sublime striking skills means we are watching a new-age Anderson Silva.

11. CM Punk. Is this for real? It feels like a bit of a stunt, but we'll just have to see how good his Kempo and jiu-jitsu are. It is very different from Brock Lesnar joining from the WWE. Let's hope Phil Brooks does not have the same issues from taking heavy strikes to the face.
12. Travis Browne is still a beast, and will challenge for the UFC heavyweight title at some point. "I toyed with him a little." Gotta love that.
13. Tony Ferguson has some chin, and will have many great lightweight fights.
14. Raquel Pennington is going to develop into a brilliant fighter, and it great to see finishes in women's fights.

no.6 :eek: lol just remembering how confused I got watching this the other night, I couldnt understand why Hendricks arm was raised but Lawler was bouncing about going nuts.
no.10 Pettis the new Silva? Pettis took some hits in the 1st round you would never have seen Silva take(in his prime )

MrStuffins

I take it that's written by Gareth A. D*ckface?

Herb Dean didn't raise anyone's arm. Hendricks was raising his own arm. Surely Dea is experienced enough not to raise someone's arm prematurely.

Also:

For the record, I scored it 48-47 Hendricks, identical to judge Sal D'Amato. I reckon D'Amato is one of the best in the business.

As in "48-47 was my opinion. Also the opinion of D'Amato. So my opinion is obviously right"

Cyber Ghost

Gareth A. Dickface lol

He's a bit of a bellend alright.

Watched the documentary "Manny" the other night and of course he pops up in the middle of it spouting his usual bull****

stiffler123

Thought Hendricks won round 2,3 and 4, round 1 was close. I wanted Robbie to win the belt but not by some dodgy decision.

p to the e

I figured the fight was scored similarly to the GSP - Hendricks fight in that the rounds that Hendricks won he won well but the other rounds could have gone either way. I wouldn't call it a robbery but I did have for Hendricks myself. Whoever gave 49-46 should be shot. As far as I remember it wasn't even Sal D'amato which is a surprise. Here's someone attempting to break it down round by round:
http://www.bloodyelbow.com/2014/12/7/7348327/ufc-181-results-sober-play-by-play-why-the-decision-for-hendricks-vs-lawler-not-robbery

Did anyone see Herb Dean flinch back when he tried to dive in to save Anthony Hamilton from Todd Duffee and Duffee was in the middle of throwing another hydrogen bomb? Wouldn't blame him. That guy is a monster. A match up with Palelei would definitely guarantee someone is going to sleep.

Melendez had the right game plan to get in close but needed to cover up more when he was standing in front of Pettis. He won the first round but took a lot of damage from it.

2ndcoming

If you compare it to the Hendricks - GSP fight if Hendricks had performed as weakly as Lawler did in this fight there would never have been the controversy that ultimately led to Hendricks winning the title when GSP stepped aside - by soundly beating Lawler.

Regardless of whether people want to see the re-rematch he's surely more deserving of one than Lawler was after losing his title shot fair and square. Like him or not this is the man who basically retired the greatest welterweight champion in UFC history, yet he lost that match and this one despite dominating both.

For me there's still a massive streak of WWE booking when it comes to the big draws on the card. UFC wanted their Cinderella story out of Lawler and they weren't gonna take no for an answer.