UFC 110 CompuStrike fight stats illustrate Wanderlei Silva's close decision win over Michael Bisping (Pic)
by Jesse Holland on Feb 21, 2010 11:08 PM EST
Email
PrintUFC 110: "Nogueira vs. Velasquez"
Wanderlei Silva defeats Michael Bisping via unanimous decision (29-28)
Fight time: Standing (12:55); Ground (2:05)
Total Strikes = Total Arm Strikes + Total Leg Strikes + Ground Strikes
Total Arm Strikes Landed = Power Strikes Landed + Clinch Strikes Landed
Total Leg Strikes Landed = Kicks Landed + Knees Landed
For a round-by-round breakdown of all the UFC 110 fight stats head over to CompuStrike by clicking here.
78 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Bisping needs to learn to take defeat like a man
Bisping looked quite good in the fight and I thought several times that he might win. Bisping’s speed, technical striking and takedowns were impressive. Conversely, Silva only looked like his old Pride self at the end of the rounds when he turned up his game. However, the CompuStrike stats clearly show that Silva won the fight. In addition, Silva came very close to choking and knocking out Bisping at the ends of rounds 2 and 3. The judges were unanimous in there decision
I can understand talking confidently before a fight, but Bisping’s statements after the fight are just plain insulting to Silva. It seems that the only way that Bisping thinks he loses a fight is if he gets finished. I would have had a lot more respect for Bisping if he would have taken his obvious defeat like a man without his incessant whining.
I wouldn't go that far Doc
5 take downs is pretty significant when added to the closeness of the striking. I thought after the match that Bisping won rounds one and two also. I didn’t think the guilltine attempt from Wand was enough to win him the second and that Bispings couple of takedowns got him the edge there.
Upon reflection I think Mike actually threw it away by mentally losing the fight once Silva started stuffing his TDs. I can understand Bisping being upset over a close decision loss but he’s hardly disrespected Silva. Didn’t Silva do the same thing after he lost to Franklin???
A burning passion from a burning mass reaches up for the sky
by Shoguns Hairy Forearms. on Feb 22, 2010 3:46 AM EST up reply actions
these stats do not show how
90% of Bisping’s strikes was him barely touching Wand, he didn’t commit to any of his strikes whereas Wand put a lot into the punches that he hit Bisping with, and the leg kicks/leg trips was also all wand in rds 2 and 3.
Wand was scoring with effective strikes in the 2 rounds he won, Bisping was not. He also had a tight submission towards the end of rd.2 that would’ve probably finished the fight had it gone on a few secs. Done deal ! close but still clear who won.
come on maaayn.
A strike is a strike tho Rob and that scores points
The majority of Wands leg kicks weren’t effective at all either but they scored. Bisping had no issues moving around. Bispings jab might not shut opponents down but it should scores.
On reflection I gave the fight to Wand because he actually wanted to finish his opponent whereas to me, Bisping only wanted to score points. He’ll never learn that he has to finish quality opponents, not fight to decisions.
A burning passion from a burning mass reaches up for the sky
by Shoguns Hairy Forearms. on Feb 22, 2010 5:08 AM EST up reply actions
no, a strike is not a strike. compare their strikes and Wand's was 10 times as hard.
that’s why it’s called effective striking if you say a strike is a strike then you have no perspective at all to what’s good or bad, Bisping landed one clean punch with some force behind it that i can recall, he didn’t even sit down behind his jabs ffs. Wand landed atleast 6-7 power punches one of them resulting in a knockdown.
and i don’t understand how they don’t count the leg sweeps as takedowns ? you have to follow a guy down to make it a takedown ? that’s complete nonsense.
come on maaayn.
' if you say a strike is a strike then you have no perspective at all to what’s good or bad'
You like your sweeping statements Rob don’t you?
A jab is an effective strike. Efficient maybe but effective none the less. Look at Wands face compared to Bispings. Who do you think had the most damage, what do you think caused that then? Think back to the Leben fight Bisping had. Who landed the power punches and who didn’t yet Lebens face was FUBAR at the end. If you get you eye closed or you face cut from a jab or a series of them it has to be an effective strike.
If Wand was landing ‘10x harder strikes’ than Bisping then how the hell was he in absolutely no danger of being Ko’d till the final 10 seconds of a 15 minute fight?
Leg sweeps aren’t takedowns either, if anything they’re knockdowns which are completely different. It’s like pushing a guy down and claiming it as a TD??
Horseshit
A burning passion from a burning mass reaches up for the sky
by Shoguns Hairy Forearms. on Feb 22, 2010 5:59 AM EST up reply actions
well, i don't really sit there and compare the two fighters faces.
when Bisping was the one who got cracked in the fight.
Bisping’s strikes adds up yes, but in this fight Wand won.
Bisping wasn’t in any real danger of being KO’d the first 14.50 because Wand didn’t hit him as clean as he did in the last 10 secs.
only thing that’s horseshit is their scoring of takedowns, why should it matter how it gets to the ground ? wand’s only takedown in the fight came from a leg sweep if i remember correctly, and was apparently only scored because he followed him down.
these stats show 1 sub attempt each, that’s a bs way of scoring if they do it that way, wand’s attempt was much closer to ending the fight and was locked in.
come on maaayn.
I was pleased with the result too
but my reasons for declaring a winner and the scoring system are at odds with each other which is why I thought Bisping could’ve got it.
Scoring a close fight is very difficult as the heart starts to rule the head
A burning passion from a burning mass reaches up for the sky
by Shoguns Hairy Forearms. on Feb 22, 2010 8:10 AM EST up reply actions
It's not a perfect scoring system
but it does help put somethings in perspective.
A burning passion from a burning mass reaches up for the sky
by Shoguns Hairy Forearms. on Feb 22, 2010 6:21 AM EST up reply actions
Anyone notice...
tonyuk has not made a single post since the event ended? “Bisping is going to crush Wandi!!!”
Sorry bro.
What you have to remember about those takedowns.
Is that they were pretty worthless. Bisping completed 5 takedowns. Which on the face of it is pretty impressive, but… for 5 takedowns over a 15 minute period, he only landed 6 strikes on the ground… and some of those, if I remember correctly were elbows he landed after Wandy had taken him down. those takedowns were a weak attempt at point scoring and didn’t have any real physical effect, or cause any damage to Wandy. Where as a submission attempt like that guillotine at the end of round 2 had a notable effect on Bisping, which you saw through his facial expression when they got up, and came, probably within another 10-20 seconds from finishing the fight.
People need to remember that the point of fighting is to inflict damage on your opponent, a takedown, unless it’s some rediculous slam, doesn’t do that. You’re right in saying that Octogan control is what decides things if it get’s close, but again, Bisping didn’t control, Wanderlei just got back to his feet each time without any real “control” from Bisping at all. If he had held him down for half a round then maybe you’d have a case.
I won the signed Matt Serra Tee!!!! whoop whoop
In the name of the Fedor, the Anderson and the GSP. Amen.
by Spinning Fat Kick on Feb 22, 2010 6:57 AM EST up reply actions
Not sure I agree that the point of fighting is to inflict damage on your opponent
Damien Maia would argue that he doesn’t have to hurt his opponent to end a fight.
Too many people have differing opinions on scoring fights and forget about the actual rules and their interpretation. My original point of a strike is a strike rings true for a takedown is a takedown. If you can take an opponent down you should receive credit for it. Don’t matter if he can pop right back up. He should stop you from taking him down. Wand did that eventually but couldn’t at first and that has to have an outcome on the scoring of the match based on aggression.
This is getting a bit off topic now….. Ultimatley, it was a close fight and those stats demonstrate that in numbers too. Thats my point.
A burning passion from a burning mass reaches up for the sky
by Shoguns Hairy Forearms. on Feb 22, 2010 8:07 AM EST up reply actions
what Demian Maia does might not hurt
but it renders his opponent unable to continue… and if he held a choke long enough he would inflict serious life threatening damage, or with most other sumissions, brake legs and arms. That was a silly comparison to make Shonuff.
Maybe if I word it differently then you’ll get it. The point of fighting is to make it so that the other guy can’t continue, to hurt him. A take down with no follow up when your opponents just stands back up is worthless because it does nothing towards that. It just temporarily inconveniences your opponent… I don’t see how it should count towards anything, if you were watching a street fight and one guy wrestled the other to the ground, only for his opponent to stand back up seconds later without getting hit or held in an at least uncomfortable position, you wouldn’t think wow he did well to take him down, you’d think what the f*ck was the point of that, it didn’t hurt the other guy, didn’t bring this fight any closer to being over… just kind of pointless…
I won the signed Matt Serra Tee!!!! whoop whoop
In the name of the Fedor, the Anderson and the GSP. Amen.
by Spinning Fat Kick on Feb 22, 2010 8:25 AM EST up reply actions
Leave Shonuff out of this
I don’t need to be told what the point of fighting is by someone who either can’t read or has obvious brain issues.
The whole point of fighting is to win by any means necessary within the rules, not to go out and fuck someones face up or break limbs like you are trying to say. Thats the difference between legalised fighting and streetfighting. Thats why your argument and hurting people to the point that they can’t continue is really flawed. Mixed Martial Arts is about more than that. In MMA you can fuck my face up for 14 minutes and 50 seconds but I can armbar you and have you tap in 5 and you wouldn’t be hurt. I win, i’m hurt, you’re not but you lose. Just like your shitty argument.
Obviously, a knuckle dragger like you wouldn’t get that tho. I’m SHF by the way and I am pleased to meet you.
A burning passion from a burning mass reaches up for the sky
by Shoguns Hairy Forearms. on Feb 22, 2010 8:48 AM EST up reply actions
picking out the fact that I typed the wrong name
saying I have brain issues, or calling me a knuckle dragger don’t make your argument any more valid.
hurting people to the point that they can’t continue
surely that is the aim of any fighter? whether you hurt them with an armbar or with your fist, it’s the same thing. BTW armbars do hurt… that’s why you tap. takedowns alone don’t achieve that. I never said anything about f*cking peoples faces up.
My “shitty agrument” as you put it was that taking somebody down without inflicting any damage and then allowing them to stand back up, is not effective aggression and doesn’t count towards winning a fight. At least if you hold someone down it’s a display of dominance, Bisping didn’t even do that.
I won the signed Matt Serra Tee!!!! whoop whoop
In the name of the Fedor, the Anderson and the GSP. Amen.
by Spinning Fat Kick on Feb 22, 2010 9:03 AM EST up reply actions
You're really not getting this are you
‘hurting people to the point that they can’t continue’ is not the aim of every fighter. I’ve already used Damien Maia as a reference for that. Armbars certainly do hurt but if you know (and you do) that you can’t get out of it, you tap. Not because it hurts but because it will break your arm if you don’t. Jesus, getting jabbed in the face hurts but you don’t tap from that right? There are many other chokes etc which don’t hurt but will do something to you if you don’t tap in time. If a fighter wants to ride it out thats his choice but the smart ones don’t.
Do you actually think any fighter takes a guy down then just allows him to get back up?? Seriously?
According to that fight metric, Bisping was the only fighter who achieved a dominant position so surely he achieved what you’re saying he didn’t do?
A burning passion from a burning mass reaches up for the sky
by Shoguns Hairy Forearms. on Feb 22, 2010 9:11 AM EST up reply actions
chokes and subs
were invented to cause damage, whether to your bones or to your brain, they weren;t invented to make people tap, in MMA if you feel your arm beinding too far or your slipping into unconciousness then you stop the fight because the damage is unnecessary but the damage is implied.
Well Bisping might not have “allowed” him up but he didn’t do a very convincing job of stopping him. stop nit picking. You know exactly what I meant.
Accordingto fight metrics yeah… but I certainly don’t remember any significant dominant positioning… do you?
I won the signed Matt Serra Tee!!!! whoop whoop
In the name of the Fedor, the Anderson and the GSP. Amen.
by Spinning Fat Kick on Feb 22, 2010 9:26 AM EST up reply actions
Implied damage?
You’re just making this shit up now. Is that what determines who wins a fight? Wandy implied putting Bisping to sleep so that is worth more than the two physical takedowns? Come on man..
I think off the top of my head Bisping had the dominant position off his first takedown (might’ve been the second). He held him down for a short period and landed strikes. Admittedly not for long but he had some success.
I’m shutting this thread down now. I don’t debate with people who don’t understand or can’t concede when they are wrong on anything.
Would’ve respected you if you had done either one of those though…
A burning passion from a burning mass reaches up for the sky
by Shoguns Hairy Forearms. on Feb 22, 2010 9:32 AM EST up reply actions
Yes, the damage is implied
Wandy might not have intended to give Bisping brain damage but if you sink in a choke for too long that’s what happens, you tap because you don’t want brain damage. But it’s almost like a threat, it’s implied that that’ll happen if you don’t tap. luckily for bisping there was only seconds left in the round. You understand?
well I hope that one day you can climb down from your ivory tower and have “respect” for people with different opinions than you. I look forward to that day.
I won the signed Matt Serra Tee!!!! whoop whoop
In the name of the Fedor, the Anderson and the GSP. Amen.
by Spinning Fat Kick on Feb 22, 2010 9:49 AM EST up reply actions
Jesus....
Wandy had to either make Bisping tap or put him to sleep. Regardless of the clock stopping he never accomplished that so to me it’s not a deciding factor or a big points winner or round winner at all. Do you understand? Tell me if that has got in your head.
Yes Bisping was shook up by it but he had a minute to recover and he did just that.
I wasn’t even in my ivory tower to tell you that but i’m on my way if you keep this crap up. Dude, opinions are opinions which are fine but facts are facts and your implied damage theory being the reason Wandy got that round is complete garbage. He didn’t complete the sub attempt so can’t be scored highly for it. Simple as that
A burning passion from a burning mass reaches up for the sky
by Shoguns Hairy Forearms. on Feb 22, 2010 9:55 AM EST up reply actions
I said that the point of a fight is to hurt the guy
you said Demian Maia etc. chokes don’t hurt
I said that they’re designed to inflict damage, in MMA you stop the fight because it’s un necessary but the damage is still implied.
Wandy choking Bisping was an example of a sub, I could have used any other, Biping was saved by the bell, I believe that if it had gone on longer then Bisping would have tapped.
Wanderlei came close to finishing the fight. I value that higher than a couple of takedowns which didn’t effect the opponent or lead anywhere. That’s why I think he won the round not because of a garbage theory. I guess if we were judges we’d just have different score cards.
I won the signed Matt Serra Tee!!!! whoop whoop
In the name of the Fedor, the Anderson and the GSP. Amen.
by Spinning Fat Kick on Feb 22, 2010 10:23 AM EST up reply actions
Well were starting to agree
Even if its just to disagree!
As I said, you can’t speculate that Bisping would’ve went to sleep off that choke. Wandy looked like he was pretty focking desperate when he had it on and obviously it wasn’t on right. It was tight as hell but if it was applied correctly Bisping would’ve been a sleep before the round ended.
I mention Maia because he actually went on record saying he loves BJJ because he doesn’t have to hurt an opponent to win, I think it was on Mania actually.
Anyway, If I were a judge and I had to score that fight on my interpretation of the rules I would give Bisping round 2, as a fan I wouldn’t. Tis all i’m saying
A burning passion from a burning mass reaches up for the sky
by Shoguns Hairy Forearms. on Feb 22, 2010 10:28 AM EST up reply actions
Wand won clearly, and having your opponent in a locked in guillotine is a dominant position.
scoring a knockdown is dominant, they need to score for actual fighting, you either finish your opponent by strikes or submission and if you don’t you get points for how much you accomplished, not for what you could have done when you sat on your opponent with an oppurtunity to do so.
Wand was close to finish 2 times and that is big, he landed the most significant strikes in the fight and had a locked in sub therefore making it clear who won and who didn’t win rounds 2 and 3.
the takedowns Bisping got was more of him tiring Wand out then of actual fighting purposes, he couldn’t do anything to Wand on the ground and was completely neutralized.
come on maaayn.
by RoBerto. on Feb 22, 2010 11:43 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Your opinions are irrelevant to the rules
And for the final time, he didn’t clearly win. Wand was plain awful man.
a blind horse could see that.
A burning passion from a burning mass reaches up for the sky
by Shoguns Hairy Forearms. on Feb 22, 2010 11:57 AM EST up reply actions
Yes
scoring a knockdown is dominant, they need to score for actual fighting, you either finish your opponent by strikes or submission and if you don’t you get points for how much you accomplished, not for what you could have done when you sat on your opponent with an oppurtunity to do so.
You are the first person I’ve seen say this and I’m in complete agreement. Comparing subs to strikes is apples and oranges but comparing the “success” rate, if you want to call it that, has a much more meaningful impact on the way I would score a fight.
by Swedish Chef smerdy herdy verdy on Feb 22, 2010 1:35 PM EST up reply actions
Also define aggression
A takedown in itself is not an aggressive act, if anything, more often than not it’s the opposite. Alot of fighters use a takedown as a way of nullifying their opponents attack, acting more defensively than anything, a take down in itself excluding any g’n’p or subs is not aggressive, it’s what you do after, that’s the aggressive part. If you get really pissed off with somebody, so pissed that you want to attack them and hurt them (a show of aggression), you don’t think “yer I’m gonna go for the double leg and then let you stand right back up, that’ll show ya!”. Bisping’s takedowns don’t count for sh*t because they didn’t, hurt Wandy… inflict damage, cause pain, render incapable, etc. etc. what ever you want to call it. They weren’t even significant enough to count for control.
I won the signed Matt Serra Tee!!!! whoop whoop
In the name of the Fedor, the Anderson and the GSP. Amen.
by Spinning Fat Kick on Feb 22, 2010 8:53 AM EST up reply actions
You're pretty hung up on hurting people aren't you?
If a takedown is not an aggressive act then what is it exactly? I go to engage you and get you down to the ground shows my intention to fight you. I agree some fighters then like to lay on an opponent but the takedown is agressive, the LnP is passive. Thats the difference.
From what you’re saying we should just get rid of TD,s Jabs, light leg kicks, punches which don’t cut or cause swelling etc etc
Why don’t we just give them knives and other weapons?
A burning passion from a burning mass reaches up for the sky
by Shoguns Hairy Forearms. on Feb 22, 2010 9:00 AM EST up reply actions
You're just plucking things out of thin air
and putting my name on them.
I never even mentioned jabs or leg kicks.
You said that Bispings takedowns were worth more than Wandy’s guillotine, I said that Wandy’s guillotine was worth more because it effected Bisping, came close to ending the fight, whilst Bisping’s TD’s did none of those things.
Jabs and leg kicks are useful weapons to any fighter, but I don’t think even 30 jabs in 1 round amount to the same value as 1 huge right hand that puts your opponent on the floor. just like a few td’s with no follow up don’t amount to a guillotine that almost ends the fight
I won the signed Matt Serra Tee!!!! whoop whoop
In the name of the Fedor, the Anderson and the GSP. Amen.
by Spinning Fat Kick on Feb 22, 2010 9:12 AM EST up reply actions
Guillotine
Wand had it on tight but he didn’t have it on right. You can only speculate as to whether Bisping would’ve went to sleep or Wandys arms would’ve gassed first. That surely can’t count as a match decider?
Jabs, light kicks, TDs etc don’t hurt fighters so in your eyes they are pointless. I’m not plucking words out of thin air, i’m debating with you based on what you’re saying.
Do you actually read these post properly or just skim over them?
A burning passion from a burning mass reaches up for the sky
by Shoguns Hairy Forearms. on Feb 22, 2010 9:17 AM EST up reply actions
No but it can count as a round decider, and..
you could see it on Bisping’s face when he stood up that it effected him. Can’t say the same about Bisping’s TD’s.
I’m not saying that things like jabs and light kicks are pointless, neither am I saying that TD’s are pointless. I haven’t said any of those things once. What I am saying however is that a whole bunch of jabs are not worth more than one big punch that rocks the guy, a whole bunch of light kicks are not worth more than one huge leg kick that buckles the guys knee, and a whole bunch of TD’s with no follow up aren’t worth a close sub attempt… surely you agree with that?
I won the signed Matt Serra Tee!!!! whoop whoop
In the name of the Fedor, the Anderson and the GSP. Amen.
by Spinning Fat Kick on Feb 22, 2010 9:32 AM EST up reply actions
No i don't but know what you're getting at
It means all I have to do is land one big shot and all the work you’ve done in the round was fucking worthless. All the technique, skill and training you’ve completed meant shit. It’s like comparing Butterbean to Ali.
Don’t get me wrong here and go back to one of my first posts about his, when guys fight they should fight to win to end the fight. But if they can’t end the fight then you have to look at what they did. One big shot per round against a guy landing 30 shots doesn’t cut the win for me. I guess I still like the A in MMA.
A burning passion from a burning mass reaches up for the sky
by Shoguns Hairy Forearms. on Feb 22, 2010 9:38 AM EST up reply actions
to me
it’s far more artful to inflict significant damage with one punch then it is to inflict not so much with 30. Would you rather paint 1000 pictures that are well executed but un interesting and don’t leave an impression or paint one picture that people will remember?
I won the signed Matt Serra Tee!!!! whoop whoop
In the name of the Fedor, the Anderson and the GSP. Amen.
by Spinning Fat Kick on Feb 22, 2010 10:01 AM EST up reply actions
ha ha, at least i'm provoking some thought now man!
It depends. Look at Hendos KO of Bisping. Probably the most caveman punch ever thrown and landed in MMA history. No skill, no art, no technique but maximum damage. There guys in pubs on a saturday night throwing exactly the same as that and they aint been trained shit
Do I think thats more artful than someone using real footwork, head movement, faints, and striking technique and skill to land 30 lesser shots? No
It’s certainly more exciting to the less demanding fan but i’d rather watch Shogun V Machida than Hendo v Bisping any day of the week.
We’ll just end it at that eh? We’re getting nowhere here….
A burning passion from a burning mass reaches up for the sky
by Shoguns Hairy Forearms. on Feb 22, 2010 10:07 AM EST up reply actions
It's berks like 'Dat' below
which make me ‘half’ stick up for Bisping in this situation even though I rightly thought he lost that fight. Wand was terrible in that fight, he just looks like a quarter of the fighter he was and it pains me to watch.
Idiots like ‘Dat’ claiming the match wasn’t even close and that Wandy was way better than Bisping are clearly blinded by hate for Bisping. I love Wand as much as anyone but believe me, i don’t love watching him fight now and I’ll call him on it too.
A burning passion from a burning mass reaches up for the sky
by Shoguns Hairy Forearms. on Feb 22, 2010 10:11 AM EST up reply actions
I guess we'll call it a day
But all that training and skill is supposed to cause damage, I don’t know what kind of martial arts training you’ve done, but I’m currently training in Muay Thai. I’ve also dabbled in Wing Chun and Shotokan in the past, but no matter what martial art I’ve ever trained in, it’s all about hurting the other guy, if you land 30 punches with out leaving much of an impression then you aren’t doing it right and are probably not a very good martial artist.
I won the signed Matt Serra Tee!!!! whoop whoop
In the name of the Fedor, the Anderson and the GSP. Amen.
by Spinning Fat Kick on Feb 22, 2010 11:04 AM EST up reply actions
OK final post
I’ve boxed when i was a bit younger. I love MT though. I agree the striking element should inflict as much damage as possible. Bisping only sustained any substantially different striking damage in the final 20 seconds of the final round and that was a wild looping punch behind the ear. Doesn’t matter who you are, you’re going down when hit there.
Look at his face, zero damage.
For people to say he was clearly outstruck or beaten is just hating. He wasn’t. He just lacked desire and killer instinct whereas wand fought clever and saved himself for the final 30 of the final two rounds.
A burning passion from a burning mass reaches up for the sky
by Shoguns Hairy Forearms. on Feb 22, 2010 11:17 AM EST up reply actions
Read the way the 10point must system scores...
Effective Aggressiveness.
This is determined as the fighter showing most effort to win. It is of no use to simply be aggressive. The fighter’s effort must be effective effort.
Silva’s effort to win, imo, was much more noticable then Bispings. Simply taking down your opponent and them standing right back up is not very effective. That is pretty much why Bispings takedowns meant squat other then the 1 time he got a dominant position.
Goldberg: "You know Joe, When Matt and his brother Mark Hughes were growing up they would pound each other behind the barn!"
But
Silva did absolutely jack shit in round 1
Improved to make it pretty even in round 2 but I still maintain two successful takedowns against one unsuccessful sub attempt (whether or not Silva popped right back up) give the edge
He won round three clearly.
All based on aggression
A burning passion from a burning mass reaches up for the sky
by Shoguns Hairy Forearms. on Feb 22, 2010 10:31 AM EST up reply actions
You get points for escaping out of a takedown
Basically the takedown was all for nothing points wise as he did no damage and Wandy was able to escape and score. When Wandy had Bisping down with the trips he did more damge those two times and scored more points than Bisping did in all his takedowns.
`Common sense is not so common - Voltaire
you may well get points for escapes
but those points aren’t weighted as highly as the aggressive points (A against C if Monkeys reproduction of the 10 point must system is correct)
A burning passion from a burning mass reaches up for the sky
by Shoguns Hairy Forearms. on Feb 22, 2010 10:40 AM EST up reply actions
ARE YOU OUT OF YOUR MIND SON.
two takedowns score more than the locked in sub attempt ? dude he was about to go to sleep and was almost finished, it’s similar to a knockdown you almost shut your opponent off and finish him.
takedowns do jack shit, wand put him down on the floor many times to with his leg sweeps.
wand getting up right away neutralize everything because nothing happened on the ground, you do not get points for getting back up, it’s more like nothing happened.
come on maaayn.
It was a failed sub attempt SON
IF my time keeping in my job was as bad as Wandys i’d be fired by now……
Again, you’ve give us your opinion a few times now. Don’t need to keep telling me the same poop…
Try reading some of the other posts, SFK probably posted everything you’re saying now anyway
A burning passion from a burning mass reaches up for the sky
by Shoguns Hairy Forearms. on Feb 22, 2010 11:59 AM EST up reply actions
Really?
A burning passion from a burning mass reaches up for the sky
by Shoguns Hairy Forearms. on Feb 22, 2010 11:37 AM EST up reply actions
As close as it may look the 10 point must is clear...
Bizzzping had 5 takedowns but Silva had 2 of his own. Add that to almost finishing the fight 2 times and landing more effective punches and you get the UD. 2 near finishes with 2 takedowns is much better then 5 takedowns and never being even close to finishing the fight…
10 point must system states…In the order of Priority: The 2 labled A are the first criteria
A-The fight is scored by Effective Aggression: This is determined as the fighter showing most effort to win. It is of no use to simply be aggressive. The fighter’s effort must be effective effort. Silva clearly took that part of the scoring with the near ko and submission attempt alone. Bizzzping never attempted to finish the fight, never commited to his punches, and at no point came close to winning the fight.
A-Effective Technique:This area includes Striking, Clinch Work, Takedowns, Submission attempts, Transitioning, and Positioning. Silva again landed more punches more kicks, a sub attempt, and easily stood up on Bispings takedowns, While Bisping only won the Takedowns and positioning(since he had 1 dominant position and the 5 takedowns vs Silvas 2) aspects of the 6 techniques scored…
B: Cage Control: This is assessed by determining which fighter has used the fighting area to his / her advantage the most. Silva took the center of the octagon all night, moved foward constantly, and never respected Bizzpings power thoughout the night.
C: Defence / Escapes:This area includes avoiding and blocking of strikes, reversals from pins and mount, escapes from submissions i.e. transitioning to avoid a submission, etc. etc. Silva escaped from 5 takedowns with little or no effort. Bizzzping didn’t defend the guilliotine at all and was only saved by the bell ringing(he just sat in it). While they through close to the same amount of strikes Silva landed at a higher percent rate(which means he defended/avoided the strikes better) and he smothered 5 of 10 takedown attempts, while Bizzping didn’t defend either of Silvas takedowns. So silva wins there to.
So while the fight itself looked/was relatively close, Silva did win all of the categories in scoring. Maybe not by leaps and bounds but he did meet most of the criteria for the UD.
Goldberg: "You know Joe, When Matt and his brother Mark Hughes were growing up they would pound each other behind the barn!"
Slightly biased DM
My point is that the sub attempt wasn’t completed so whilst it was an aggressive move to win the match, he wasn’t successful. Bisping had a sub attempt which failed too. Admittedly it was very poor but from those rules he was aggressively looking to win the fight. So where does this fit in if we’re following your interpretation above?
Wands striking improved as the fight progressed but he never dominated anything till round three in that department.
He never held the centre of the octagon in round one either so he wasn’t there all day. He was downright awful in round one actually.
I could go on but i’m tiring of this now…..
A burning passion from a burning mass reaches up for the sky
by Shoguns Hairy Forearms. on Feb 22, 2010 10:24 AM EST up reply actions
Maybe slightly biased =)
I will admit that, but I think you are correct about round 1. Wandy kind of stole it at the end if anything. I just don’t think Bisping really ever look like he wanted to win the fight. I absolutely hate Bisping but I will say that he is much more improved since get his clock cleaned by Hendo. He has definetly stepped up his game, or Wandy just looked that bad not sure, LOL. I just can’t don’t think he has the ability to be aggresive against the top level fighters in the MW division. I think after the first Wandy warmed up and just pushed foward in rounds 2 and 3. At no point did he even look threatened even with the takedowns that Bisping had….
Goldberg: "You know Joe, When Matt and his brother Mark Hughes were growing up they would pound each other behind the barn!"
Totally agree with everything you've said
I’ve never actually disputed anything you’ve said. My point is more about the scoring system and people interpretations of it (my own included).
Bisping lacks confidence (amoungst other things) against quality opponents, look at how he behaves during the fight (telling his wife and kids he loves them between rounds, jumping around like he on crack trying to motivate himself) It’s as if he thinks he’s not coming out of the octagon alive.
A burning passion from a burning mass reaches up for the sky
by Shoguns Hairy Forearms. on Feb 22, 2010 10:36 AM EST up reply actions
Bisping clearly lost
But he did show promise and the ability to compete against Wandy. Bisping just needs to keep training and focused on improving his all around game and he will be a top contender at the very least with another three or four fights under his belt.
`Common sense is not so common - Voltaire
Bisping needs to find the killer instinct
I think his issue are more mental than physical.
BTW i don’t think he clearly lost.
A burning passion from a burning mass reaches up for the sky
by Shoguns Hairy Forearms. on Feb 22, 2010 10:45 AM EST up reply actions
EXACTLY
I think Bisping could have finished this fight twice if he had more killer instinct. Its exactly what he needs, and I also dont think he clearly lost, but I still agree with the decision.
by theworldismine on Feb 22, 2010 10:55 AM EST up reply actions
You've just paraphrased my 3000 posts in this thread theworldismine
Thanks :-)
A burning passion from a burning mass reaches up for the sky
by Shoguns Hairy Forearms. on Feb 22, 2010 10:57 AM EST up reply actions
LOL To coming out of the octagon alive....
I was rolling for minutes on that one. MY wife is a total Bizzping fan cause she thinks he is good looking, thankfully that does not make him a great fighter! She gets so hot under the collar when I start bashing him!
Goldberg: "You know Joe, When Matt and his brother Mark Hughes were growing up they would pound each other behind the barn!"
you could point out facts all day.....
but opinions are opinions, i thought mike won, but looking at the stats, and hearing everyones unbiased approach, i should concede to the greater and higher intellects on this site and just accept the fact that i don’t know anything about anything……..thanks for helping me out guys……..
love, don't hate - freedom
freedom is not a nasty person, speak sense to him and he's fine - elvis presley
by freedomthrtyfve on Feb 22, 2010 10:41 AM EST up reply actions
LOL big time JRE did not expect Wandy to lsoe in the clinch
`Common sense is not so common - Voltaire
Yeah but lost in the stand-up, ground and leg kicks! Three out of four aint bad unless you’re Michael Bitchping! He lost, deal with it!
by Sofa-King-Toasty on Feb 22, 2010 12:40 AM EST via mobile up reply actions
If Bisping is making the case...
then it seems to be based solely on takedowns, ignoring the striking numbers (though Wand did look a little sloppy, it’s still not a beauty contest). It wasn’t a blow-out the way Soti/Joe-D was, but Want took this one fairly enough.
But this is what fighters do… they rationalize for their egos or for their wallets.
Take away the first round and these numbers would be even more lopsided
The fact tha the wasnèt able to do anything with the takedown and Wandy easily escaped gives Wandy more points if anything. Add the knock down in round three and near finishing choke in round two itès easy to see Wandy won the second and third.
`Common sense is not so common - Voltaire
Take away the first round and these numbers would be even more lopsided
do you realise what you have just said?
thats like saying take away the 2nd and 3rd and bisping won……
but i think i know what you meant…….i think
love, don't hate - freedom
freedom is not a nasty person, speak sense to him and he's fine - elvis presley
by freedomthrtyfve on Feb 22, 2010 10:27 AM EST up reply actions
Wand got the edge because...
he almost finished Bisping at the end of rounds 2 and 3, which allowed for him to steal both.
yea cause he did nothing else in those rounds
and the stats show it right??
"The Red-eyed Jedi...holds a 7th degree Black Belt in Bonghitisu"
by ItsNormlToSmokePot on Feb 22, 2010 12:59 AM EST up reply actions
oh
I guess trip sweeps, and tons of leg kicks are nothing?
while taking little damage and controlling the center of the ring?
Quick. somebody is wrong on the internet.
"One should always be cold minded and remember that a ridiculous incident may occur any time."
by At Least On Paper on Feb 22, 2010 1:38 AM EST up reply actions
The last round
is always the championship round… It was a close fight but Wanderlei had to get the decision.. Bisping didnt do as much damage.
BTW gotta love how Wanderlei goes for the soccer kick at the end of round 3
PRIDE!!!!
by The real ZACK on Feb 22, 2010 6:52 PM EST up reply actions
Bisping such a cry baby bitch
I used to like em but just cant stand em anymore hope he gets KO’d in his next 5fights maybe he will stfu then
If you dont like drugs then dont do them.....give them to me!
So excited to see Wandi fight. He didn’t gas and almost knocked out Bisping. Now he will be getting in the groove of being at 185 and it should be very exciting. Can’t wait to see him fight Akiyama. Can’t wait to see him fight again period. Glad to see Wandi winning—especially in his middleweight debut. YEAH!
Think Akiyama will be a great fight!
But a tough one for Wand, he hits harder than Bisping and takes a punch well.
On the whole point of Bisping “talking shit” again – he’s said nothing different than when Wandy got beat by Franklin, it’s all just bias on here – he hasn’t slagged off Wandy, just stated how he thinks the fight went. Wandy showed his experience by taking his time and putting all his effort into the last 30 secs of each round, a surefire way to win points with the judges. In a close match he came closest to finishing and deserved the W.
Surely Bisping needs to see a boxing coach now – Fedor gets away with arm punches, Bisping doesn’t. Would suggest Rampage could teach him a thing or two but not after his coaching on TuF… Dammit I’d happily go show Bisping how to hit hard – at least start swinging sledgehammers, get some real core strength and used to twisting the body when he throws – even Bas Rutten has decent vids on Youtube explaining how to hit hard FFS :D
Good post Jimrod
A burning passion from a burning mass reaches up for the sky
by Shoguns Hairy Forearms. on Feb 22, 2010 11:01 AM EST up reply actions
Ill
be happy to cheer for Wandy against Akiyama
by theworldismine on Feb 22, 2010 10:57 AM EST up reply actions
So Wand complimented Rampage after the fight… I still say Bisping is a nice guy and proved he’s good. War Wand.
"Once Flamengo, Flamengo until die"
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
