UFC 75: -Spoilers Inside-

We may earn a small commission from affiliate links and paid advertisements. Terms

Of course he was robbed, it was clear. Fortunately or unfortunately, Dana White is not a judge but rather an owner. The flack needs to fall on the judges for making a poor decision, we don't want to watch MMA turn into boxing.
 
1) it was in the UK
2) they want bisping to be a contender
3) hamill is american and deaf so he wouldn't be a good "face"

and yes, it will eventually turn into boxing. i've been saying things will go down hill for a while now. i'm such a pessimist.
 
He let Bisping up, twice. He lost the fight more than Bisping won. Big difference.

...you fail to see how the fights are judged.

Octagon control and take downs are both on the score cards. Which do you think Hamil demonstrated by dominating the ring and taking Bisping down at his leisure? Regardless of whether he was toying with him or not, the fact that he could toy with him, as you so elegantly put it, just illustrates the fact that Hamil controlled the pace of the match and thus would be considered the victor.

Additionally, Hamil inflicted far more damage, as we saw Bisping face bright red after the first round.

So where then did Hamil lose the fight or give the fight away?

I know you'll argue till you're blue in the face, even though you picked a poor topic to debate when the picture was crystal clear.

If Bisping inflicted damage after Hamil toyed with him, it would be an entirely different story. Clearly, that did not happen.
 
He let Bisping up, twice. He lost the fight more than Bisping won. Big difference.
He could of let him up a million times and still should of gotten the decision. You don't lose points for letting someone up. It's a points system, not a "I don't like what he just did" system.

You can re-word your point a thousand different ways but it still won't change the fact that Hamil won in points no matter what his octagon ethics were.
 
...you fail to see how the fights are judged.

Octagon control and take downs are both on the score cards. Which do you think Hamil demonstrated by dominating the ring and taking Bisping down at his leisure? Regardless of whether he was toying with him or not, the fact that he could toy with him, as you so elegantly put it, just illustrates the fact that Hamil controlled the pace of the match and thus would be considered the victor.

Additionally, Hamil inflicted far more damage, as we saw Bisping face bright red after the first round.

So where then did Hamil lose the fight or give the fight away?

I know you'll argue till you're blue in the face, even though you picked a poor topic to debate when the picture was crystal clear.

If Bisping inflicted damage after Hamil toyed with him, it would be an entirely different story. Clearly, that did not happen.

Exactly my point, there's no grey area on how the fight is scored, and Hamill wins on those points. Give the fight to Bisbing because Hamill let him up? When Hamill wanted him down he tookhim and and when he wanted to let him back up he let him back up, Hamill was always in control in rounds 1 &2. By the UFC rules he won
 
Well, the judges apparently saw it my way because Hamill lost. Cry about it some more.

Mature.

When your irrational argument fails, you resort to useless banter. How uncharacteristic of you...


I'll play nice, nice simply because I think you just have a propensity to evoke emotion from harmless internet bickering, which I can respect.
 
Last edited:
I wonder if anybody in this thread realizes that the entire event sucked donkey balls.


The only good fight was the title fight - and it was b0ring to watch after the first 2 rounds.
 
I wonder if anybody in this thread realizes that the entire event sucked donkey balls.


The only good fight was the title fight - and it was b0ring to watch after the first 2 rounds.
i didn't see it. should i just not even worry about watching it when they air it on spike?
 
I wonder if anybody in this thread realizes that the entire event sucked donkey balls.


The only good fight was the title fight - and it was b0ring to watch after the first 2 rounds.
Yeah watching Houston demolish someone was a joke...

Watching a technical match with Henderson and Jackson was a wash as well.

Hamil and Bisping weren't that interesting but the decision was interesting.

Cro Cop was a disappointment but he also had his ribs broken in the second round and still went on to finish the fight.

The two welterweights were good as well.

Really this was one of the better events as of recently and someone who competes you should see the merit in the technical matches as opposed to just the smash mouth, knock down, drag out brawls.
 
I wonder if anybody in this thread realizes that the entire event sucked donkey balls.


The only good fight was the title fight - and it was b0ring to watch after the first 2 rounds.

Bisping and Hammill was exciting. I know you aren't happy unless people are getting knocked out, and I know you fail to appreciate the technical side of ground fighting. So yeah I can see why you didn't like it

the only REAL snooze fest was Kongo and Cro Cop, boy you Pride rules UFC drools people need to figure out a reason why Cro Cop keeps getting outclassed
 
Bisping and Hammill was exciting. I know you aren't happy unless people are getting knocked out, and I know you fail to appreciate the technical side of ground fighting. So yeah I can see why you didn't like it
Bisping's standup was horrendous. Did you see how unprepared he looked in the first round? Being all jittery like that lol - what a tool.

Hammill is as dumb as he is deaf for letting the fight slip out of his grip like that.

the only REAL snooze fest was Kongo and Cro Cop, boy you Pride rules UFC drools people need to figure out a reason why Cro Cop keeps getting outclassed

Yeah, that fight was a serious disappointment.
 
The only way any of u guys can relize how hard it is to do what they do is do it yourself i train mma 3 times a work and work out twice a day mon-fri its always easy to say your thoughts from watching a FIGHT on tv because we get the best angles most judges are seated across three different sides of the arena/ring so they see something different then the other two and vice versa.but i fowllow ufc alot along with other mma fights and hammel does APPEAR to be tired threw most of his fights and judges see that and they judge apon that but bizbing showed me NONTHING in the fight.
 
The only way any of u guys can relize how hard it is to do what they do is do it yourself i train mma 3 times a work and work out twice a day mon-fri its always easy to say your thoughts from watching a FIGHT on tv because we get the best angles most judges are seated across three different sides of the arena/ring so they see something different then the other two and vice versa.but i fowllow ufc alot along with other mma fights and hammel does APPEAR to be tired threw most of his fights and judges see that and they judge apon that but bizbing showed me NONTHING in the fight.


I have 7 years of MMA under my belt as of right now. I know exactly what I am talking about. They were boring ass fights, from a bunch of un-talented assbags (except Hammil, Ranpage, and Henderson).

The guy who beat cro cop was so un-flexible that he could only knee him in the balls. What tallent :rolleyes:
 
I slept through most of it.
I dont have shit for MMA training, but I have respect for ALL fighters.
I like watching it.
Hammil should've won, but fuck it. He didn't. I hear a rematch is in the works... so Im in for updates on that fight, cant wait.
 
Back
Top