UFC 202 Event Thread: Diaz v McGregor 2 (Information in OP)

jon1981

Should the walking away antics be negatively marked? What's ppls views on that?

Admittedly I've only seen a few 5 rounders and not much walking away during a round. If fighters started to use that tactic to recover I could imagine boring fights ahead!

newbbieb

jon1981 wrote: »

Should the walking away antics be negatively marked? What's ppls views on that?

Admittedly I've only seen a few 5 rounders and not much walking away during a round. If fighters started to use that tactic to recover I could imagine boring fights ahead!

I think moving to re-centre yourself is fine,he was hardly not engaging.

JoeyJJ

Diaz via Decision

My stomach was in knots during that fight like someone else said when he hit the wall earlier I was cursing him taking the fight however thankfully 2nd wind came. Had it 48-47 along with mates I was whatsapping. 13/2 bet on Conor on points was a rash decision yesterday after winning a bet stuck the winnings of that on it and boom Manchester paid for

shocksy

McGregor via Submission

asteroids over berlin wrote: »

Thought Diaz won last 3 rounds myself, far tougher fighter, iunfortunately or fortunately he doesnt have the astute attacking skills Conor has, if he had Conor would be gone by the first roundAnyway, i guess fair play to Conor, up the Irish

What planet are you living on if you think Diaz won the 4th round? Seriously, Go to bed.

TitianGerm

py2006 wrote: »

Full fight here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G4vqm20vb-Q

Thanks for that. I fell asleep last night and missed the fight.

It was a great fight and I'm sorry I missed it live.

On McGregor last night - good take down defense, crisp clean shots in the first three rounds but did tire after that, good work on the leg kicks to slow Diaz, and some nice work in the clinch. I also liked that he didn't charge in once he knocked Diaz down to try and finish the fight early as he would have played into Diaz superior BJJ game.

newbbieb

shocksy wrote: »

What planet are you living on if you think Diaz won the 4th round? Seriously, Go to bed.

I think round 5 is pretty close too,but even if you forget the 10 point rule,Conors control of the 25 minutes was a lot longer than Nates,3 clean knockdowns is big without really getting taken down himself.

listermint

jon1981 wrote: »

Should the walking away antics be negatively marked? What's ppls views on that?

Admittedly I've only seen a few 5 rounders and not much walking away during a round. If fighters started to use that tactic to recover I could imagine boring fights ahead!

Is it your assertion this fight was boring because that is what you are actually saying with those comments.

Discuss

wonderfullife

McGregor via Submission

irishguy1983 wrote: »

Is Diaz a bit of a freak the way he keeps coming back? Are others in that weight division a bit more like that?

Do people feel Conor would knock out most with punches he was getting in on Diaz?

I just couldn't believe the way Diaz kept coming back after some really, really clean connections from Conor.

Look, Conor isn't a welterweight. People can say Diaz isn't either but the truth is Diaz has the frame to be a welterweight. Conor is 5'9 and call a spade a spade his fit, healthy, fighting weight is 155lbs. And can we please stop this talk of Conor walking around at 180lbs? He doesn't weigh 13 stone even if he was eating McDonalds all day. He had a hard time getting to a lean 168.

Win or Learn is Kavanaghs thing.

Well Conor learned that yes he can beat heavier opponents in an un-natural weight class - but with a ton of gameplanning and fighting smart. So, no, he won't knock out most fighters in that weight class. Maybe one or two.

Heat_Wave wrote: »

Having watched the whole thing just there, surely Diaz was the deserving winner? He seemed to have put up much more of a fight, whereas McGregor was on the defence majority of the time from what I saw

No idea what fight you watched.

StringerBell wrote: »

Not going to wade through the raft of posts on here, just to say two things

Fair play to Conor, hung on there for a long time, he has plenty of heart and two, he lost that fight.

Poor decision but not exactly a shocker ( I am not saying it was a screw job in any way, I can understand how the judges saw it the way they did I just saw it slightly different, I had it 3/2 to Diaz)

Great performance from both men.

as has been said multiple times, 95% of media outlets scored it 48-47 conor. One had it 49-46 Conor, four had it 47-47, one had it 48-47 Nate. The rest (around 22 outlets) had it for Conor.

Dan Hardy, who i find the most reliable analyst, scored it as follows:

RD1 - 10-8 Conor
RD2 - 10-9 Conor (and he even said that was en route to 10-8 until nate rallied)
RD3 - 10-8 Nate
RD4 - 10-9 Conor
RD5 - 10-9 Nate

Fight Metric shows Conor landed more significant strikes in Rounds 1, 2 and 4.

Conor dropped Nate 3 times during Rounds 1, 2 and 4.

Conor stuffed every Takedown attempt during Rounds 1, 2 and 4.

Conor landed over 25 leg kicks in Rounds 1, 2 and 4.

By every possible parameter, Conor won Rounds 1, 2 and 4.

How can you possibly argue Nate won a Round in which Conor dropped him? The late rally in Round 2 for Diaz only stopped it being 10-8 Conor.


If you're arguing otherwise, you're either a) a conor-hater b) a Diaz lover c) a begrudger. d) all of the above.

I'm sure there'll be plenty more posters saying Nate won so i encourage you all to re-watch the fight.

People seem to be taking the 25 mins of action and determining Nate shaded the contest. That's not how you score a fight. And even then that's debateable.

This is my "pinned post" so to speak.

jon1981

listermint wrote: »

Is it your assertion this fight was boring because that is what you are actually saying with those comments.

Discuss

No ... however if both fighters were to play that game I would consider it boring.

Outlaw Pete

McGregor via Submission

jon1981 wrote: »

Should the walking away antics be negatively marked? What's ppls views on that?

Each time Nate poked fun at him when he did that, I noticed he wasn't doing all that much to close in on Conor. It's mma at the end of the day, nothing stopping Nate from running at him and leg kicking him or whatever. Just standing there and laughing / complaining cause your opponent is not fighting the way you want them to is a bit odd to me, in this sport at least. Different circumstances I know, but Cormier got a similar kind of thing for the way he fought Silva and he shouldn't have imo. Fighters have to fight to their strengths. I mean, Nate could have got up a little quicker when he was knocked down than he did and was clearly hoping he could entice Conor to the ground, so he wasn't above trying to steer the fight in a direction that suited him more himself.

jcd5971

Right after my 3rd time watching,

Round 1 Mcg 10-9
Diaz did nothing.

Round 2 mcg 10-9
Diaz came strong in last 45 seconds but mcg dodged and parried most of that barrage, looked good but when you watch it technically not alot of scoring blows for judges to give. Also mcg with TWO knockdowns clear mcg round.

Round 3 Diaz 10-9
Mcg did nothing there is an argument for Diaz 10-8 but if your awarding a 10-8 that easy then mcg in round 1 is also 10-8 I feel 10-9 is the fairer reflection.

Round 4 mcg 10-9
Alot of back and forth but mcg landed more clean shots. Arguments about mcg running and not engaging, he only circled away to reset and attack again. But if you wanted to give it to Diaz for aggression and octagon control as per scoring system I'd counter with mcg doing far more damage, Diaz with both eyes and cheek cut as well as busted nose.

Round 5 Diaz 10-9
Again very back and forth like rnd 4 but Diaz gets it for controlling mcg against the cage and the late takedown seals it.

So there that's how I see it as mcgregor by 3 rnds to 2.

Sorry for rambling post I'm off the bed ted.

clever user name

McGregor via Submission

wonderfullife wrote: »

Look, Conor isn't a welterweight. People can say Diaz isn't either but the truth is Diaz has the frame to be a welterweight. Conor is 5'9 and call a spade a spade his fit, healthy, fighting weight is 155lbs. And can we please stop this talk of Conor walking around at 180lbs? He doesn't weigh 13 stone even if he was eating McDonalds all day. He had a hard time getting to a lean 168.

Win or Learn is Kavanaghs thing.

Well Conor learned that yes he can beat heavier opponents in an un-natural weight class - but with a ton of gameplanning and fighting smart. So, no, he won't knock out most fighters in that weight class. Maybe one or two.


No idea what fight you watched.




as has been said multiple times, 95% of media outlets scored it 48-47 conor. One had it 49-46 Conor, four had it 47-47, one had it 48-47 Nate. The rest (around 22 outlets) had it for Conor.

Dan Hardy, who i find the most reliable analyst, scored it as follows:

RD1 - 10-8 Conor
RD2 - 10-9 Conor (and he even said that was en route to 10-8 until nate rallied)
RD3 - 10-8 Nate
RD4 - 10-9 Conor
RD5 - 10-9 Nate

Fight Metric shows Conor landed more significant strikes in Rounds 1, 2 and 4.

Conor dropped Nate 3 times during Rounds 1, 2 and 4.

Conor stuffed every Takedown attempt during Rounds 1, 2 and 4.

Conor landed over 25 leg kicks in Rounds 1, 2 and 4.

By every possible parameter, Conor won Rounds 1, 2 and 4.

How can you possibly argue Nate won a Round in which Conor dropped him? The late rally in Round 2 for Diaz only stopped it being 10-8 Conor.


If you're arguing otherwise, you're either a) a conor-hater b) a Diaz lover c) a begrudger. d) all of the above.

I'm sure there'll be plenty more posters saying Nate won so i encourage you all to re-watch the fight.

People seem to be taking the 25 mins of action and determining Nate shaded the contest. That's not how you score a fight. And even then that's debateable.

This is my "pinned post" so to speak.

My thoughts exactly. Great post. Nate is one of my favorite fighters, so I'd like to think I'm not too biased. It was close, but having watched it 3 times now, Conor won IMO.

Also, you've got to love people saying it would have been bad for business if Nate won, or was a fix. Is this just trolling? Or do they actually think the UFC judge the fights?

I'm not talking about people here, more so on other sites. Although a couple of people here did allude to the idea that it would be bad for business if Nate won :pac:

Thelomen Toblackai

Diaz via Decision

jon1981 wrote: »

Should the walking away antics be negatively marked? What's ppls views on that?

Admittedly I've only seen a few 5 rounders and not much walking away during a round. If fighters started to use that tactic to recover I could imagine boring fights ahead!

It's little different than holding on in the clinch or on the ground to get a breather really. It does get factored in though as if you're not active and not fighting then you are allowing your opponent to win that moment of the fight just by the sheer fact he's active even if it's just moving towards you.

IIRC Lawler won a title in a decision over Henricks in a close fight over similar things. Hendricks walked away, held on the ground after takedowns, just basically wasted time as he was gassed. And even though he was imo more effective at controlling Lawler in the rest of the fight Lawler got the nod because Hendricks time spent avoiding the fight cost him and Lawler's aggression and activity pipped a crucial round.

froog

Amazing. Conor silenced a LOT of critics last night.

cletus

McGregor's movement to reset in the centre was hardly Kaleb Starnes level. Both Diaz brothers have been known to complain that fighters are "running away" if they do anything other than stand toe to toe and swing until somebody falls down (Condit vs. Diaz). I also have never seen either brother acknowledge a loss.

The idea that the fight was in some way fixed baffles me. The damage to the brand would be huge if it was discovered.

I am surprised by some suggestions on here that a knockdown does not count for anything unless the fighter follows down to the ground. A knockdown surely falls under effective striking.

Lastly, commenting on who won the fight, without actually watching the fight, is possibly the highlight of this thread for me.

Gamb!t

Diaz via Decision

Call Me Jimmy wrote: »

A big difference in this one was that he wasn't surprised when diaz didnt fall to his monster shots.

I thought he was a little too cautious when he knocked diaz down a couple times.

But the ground game would be playing into Diaz's hands.
He made the right call standing up as he had more options with kicks and punches as opposed to trying to beat Diaz on the ground.

clever user name

McGregor via Submission

Bit cringy with his excuses, but I spent last 10 minutes of this laughing. He's high as f**k.

'Hey I thought Ariel Helwani got fired' :pac::D

cournioni

This fight showed a lot of flaws in Nates game plan for me. Wait for your opponent to gas, go in with some big intense shots to rattle the opponent, hope that he panics and goes off the feet so that he can impose a ground game on a much smaller (size and weight) fighter for a submission. You could see his desperation when it wasn't going to plan, he resorted to brawling and his attempts to push Conor up to the fence for a takedown.

Conor learnt from the last time not to panic once he started gassing, stay out of the way of shots and catch a breather, get a second wind and go again. If he had done this in UFC196 he would have won it also. Conor fought the much smarter and more measured fight, targeting Diaz's front leg and going in with clever counter punches which clearly rattled Diaz.

Looking forward to McGregor vs Diaz 3 already as it is hopefully 155 and evens up the size a bit. Should make for an even better contest. Conor's cardio should improve a lot at that weight also.

Kirby

cletus wrote: »

McGregor's movement to reset in the centre was hardly Kaleb Starnes level. Both Diaz brothers have been known to complain that fighters are "running away" if they do anything other than stand toe to toe and swing until somebody falls down (Condit vs. Diaz). I also have never seen either brother acknowledge a loss.

The idea that the fight was in some way fixed baffles me. The damage to the brand would be huge if it was discovered.

I am surprised by some suggestions on here that a knockdown does not count for anything unless the fighter follows down to the ground. A knockdown surely falls under effective striking.

Lastly, commenting on who won the fight, without actually watching the fight, is possibly the highlight of this thread for me.

Well there is a difference between a knockdown, and a takedown.

Under the new rules, takedowns are not valued the same as before. Plenty of fighters were getting takedowns and either laying on top doing nothing or letting the other fighter get straight back up......and still winning rounds off it. With the new rules, its not your takedown that counts with the judges.....but what you accomplish with it.

So for example with the new rules, the Takedown that Nate got in the last 15 seconds means nothing because he didnt do anything with it. It will be interesting to see how the scoring evolves in the future because of this.

Now, a striking knockdown is a different kettle of fish. Thats much more of a factor.

everlast75

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Each time Nate poked fun at him when he did that, I noticed he wasn't doing all that much to close in on Conor. It's mma at the end of the day, nothing stopping Nate from running at him and leg kicking him or whatever. Just standing there and laughing / complaining cause your opponent is not fighting the way you want them to is a bit odd to me, in this sport at least. Different circumstances I know, but Cormier got a similar kind of thing for the way he fought Silva and he shouldn't have imo. Fighters have to fight to their strengths. I mean, Nate could have got up a little quicker when he was knocked down than he did and was clearly hoping he could entice Conor to the ground, so he wasn't above trying to steer the fight in a direction that suited him more himself.

excellent post!

clever user name

McGregor via Submission

The main event was immense. So much so that I actually forgot how amazing the rest of the card was.

Rumble is the scariest motherfu**er I've ever seen in the cage. He also won me some money!

Cerrone is a beast at welterweight. That finishing combination was beautiful.

Tim Means is back.

Garbrant is a killer. Would love to see him knock Cruz clean out.

Larkin gets the most impressive performance of the night in my books. Completely dismantled Magny. Did not see that coming. Would like to see him fight Gastelum next.

Witcher

Deadst4r wrote: »

Since after timing is allowed here, I'd be interested to know if anyone put any money down on McGregor for decision

Had a tenner on him at 6/1 with PP myself, had to sign up to a new account with them so used my free bet for it:pac: Used my actual money on a RD3 stoppage for him, guessed that if he hadn't done it by then that it would go to a decision if he was to win.

http://imgur.com/cjDGX0e

Dempsey

They both gassed at times

McGregor had the smarts not to get chewed up like Diaz did to the point that blood was getting in his eyes. Diaz didnt have much of a strategy, he didnt need to but McGregor did and kept thinking when tired. A massive improvement on the mental shutdown he had in the last fight.

I dont think there can be any complaints about the scoring either. Dont see what Diaz did to trump McGregors knockdowns in the 2nd, the only round where it could be argued the scoring was wrong.

darced

Diaz via Submission

This post has been deleted.

J Mysterio

Seanachai wrote: »

Does anybody remember what the betting odds were for a decision victory for McGregor? I'm delighted for McGregor but I feel sick that I changed my mind and went for a third round KO instead.

7-1 on coral sports anyway.

cletus

Kirby wrote: »

cletus wrote: »

McGregor's movement to reset in the centre was hardly Kaleb Starnes level. Both Diaz brothers have been known to complain that fighters are "running away" if they do anything other than stand toe to toe and swing until somebody falls down (Condit vs. Diaz). I also have never seen either brother acknowledge a loss.

The idea that the fight was in some way fixed baffles me. The damage to the brand would be huge if it was discovered.

I am surprised by some suggestions on here that a knockdown does not count for anything unless the fighter follows down to the ground. A knockdown surely falls under effective striking.

Lastly, commenting on who won the fight, without actually watching the fight, is possibly the highlight of this thread for me.

Well there is a difference between a knockdown, and a takedown.

Under the new rules, takedowns are not valued the same as before. Plenty of fighters were getting takedowns and either laying on top doing nothing or letting the other fighter get straight back up......and still winning rounds off it. With the new rules, its not your takedown that counts with the judges.....but what you accomplish with it.

So for example with the new rules, the Takedown that Nate got in the last 15 seconds means nothing because he didnt do anything with it. It will be interesting to see how the scoring evolves in the future because of this.

Now, a striking knockdown is a different kettle of fish. Thats much more of a factor.

I understand how the takedown system works, and the changes that were made.

The section of my post you highlighted refers specifically to the knockdown that occurred in round two. Some posters suggested it shouldn't be given much weight because McGregor failed to follow Diaz to the ground.

I was saying that a knockdown (as opposed to a takedown) should be marked on its own merit, falling under effective striking.

There is no onus on a fighter to engage with his or her opponent on the ground. If Diaz wants McGregor on the ground, its up to him to put the fight there. Inviting him into his guard doesn't count

hatrickpatrick

McGregor via Submission

JaMarcusHustle wrote: »

Dominant. A cereal display.

Edit: Well that was meant to say cerebral but I like how cereal sounds.

This needs to become a meme for future McGregor bouts

RyanDrive

Deadst4r wrote: »

Since after timing is allowed here, I'd be interested to know if anyone put any money down on McGregor for decision

Stuck a good bit on it @ 13/2 (there were actually better odds elsewhere). Because of the focus on cardio in the build-up and Diaz's toughness tthought it was most likely. Completely forgot about it until I woke up this morning because I was so engrossed in the fight. Nice little bonus to wake up to :cool:

blueskys

Just watched it again. Delighted for Conor, a measured performance and he learned a lot from the first one, a lot more than Nate. Defintely needs to work on his cardio though, a fitter guy just putting constant pressure on him would have him in trouble. Nate didn't do that, i.e chasing him when he was taking breathers, which is his own fault.

califano

Diaz via Submission

McGregor wins!