Nick Diaz blew it. Not only fighting, but what he said after the fight. He faught a stupid fight and he faught like he was sparring and not like he was fighting for a belt. I'll give him a week to take back what he said after the fight, but if he can't watch himself in the octagon and then tell himself he didn't deserve to win then he should retire. I am a fan of Diaz but he didn't fight with any urgancy and my hats off to Condit. Condit faught a solid and smart fight. He moved well and threw a veriety of kicks and punches. His endurance was fantastic and he never looked like he was in danger.
As fallow up questions:
What does this say about BJ Penn since he was crushed by Diaz?
Does Diaz only fight to the level of his opponents?
I'll give you my thoughts later if anyone has an opinion on those questions.
Does Diaz only fight to the level of his opponents?
I'll give you my thoughts later if anyone has an opinion on those questions.
No, it's the old "styles make fights" cliche. I think Condit just had a perfect skillset & gameplan for Diaz (but it won't work against GSP). After the 2nd/3rd round, I would've expected to see Diaz go for the takedown a lot more.
When I watched the fight live, I thought Diaz easily won rounds 1,2, and 5. When I watched it the next day after all the hullabaloo, I saw Diaz winning 1,2,3, and 5.
Philosophically, you guys are on very dangerous ground.
Dana White has always said that the UFC will be the biggest sport in the world because people are more interesting in fighting than anything else. And he's right. If you're at the Super Bowl and a fight breaks out in the stands, you (and everyone else) is going to take your eyes off the action on the field to check out the fight. Similarly, everyone in the UFC and the media credits Bonnar-Griffin as the catalyst that lead to the huge upswing in popularity of MMA in recent years.
People want to see fights. But the UFC, state athletic commissions, and fight judges have set up a system of perverse incentives that rewards fighters for avoiding fights rather than engaging in them.
I understand the arguments that Condit avoided Diaz's strikes for the most part. I understand that he landed more strikes than Diaz. But at no point did Condit ever look to do damage with any of his strikes, and none of his strikes did. Condit's goal wasn't to fight; it was to keep Nick Diaz from fighting while scoring enough points so that when time ran out, he'd be the winner.
If you reward that sort of behavior with favorable judging, you're going to end up with a product that isn't compelling to watch, that won't be popular, that is the exact opposite of the manner in which the sport is marketed. You will essentially have a huge failure on your hands eventually.
At some point, a fighter has to stay in the pocket and fight to be considered a fighter.
While I had problems with this idea before, I'm starting to agree with those who believe that there should be no judges. If no one finishes a fight, the fight should end in a draw. Yes there will be a ton of draws, but there will be great fights because guys will actually be fighting instead of trying to outpoint people for decisions.
I understand the personalities of the two guys involved and why some people want to pile on top of Diaz. On the UG, they brought up an interesting point: if Bisping had fought like Condit did, everyone would be screaming bloody murder about how much of a sissy he was.
These guys who state "oh, what's he supposed to do, stand there and let Diaz hit him" are totally missing the point. There's a difference between elusiveness and literally turning your back and running. If you sign up to fight, at some point you're going to have to fight.
everyone at my ladyfriend's parents' house *****ed about the decision of that fight. they are all big Diaz fans though. i told them flat out "drop your fandom for a second and judge it based on the rules as they sit, and he lost. if you want to argue the *********** nature of the points system, then i 100% agree with you. its the points system that is wrong, not Condit. his corner studied Diaz, and Condit did exactly what he had to do to get past Diaz and onto GSP"
with that said, they need to severely change the points system and get guys back to fighting instead of scoring.
I believe he won with striking & leg kicks while avoiding damage from Diaz. The UFC is a sport which requires athletes to evolve, and Condit clearly showed he can evolve as well as any top mixed martial artist. Condit can bang, he chose to follow this game-plan knowing he was more multi-faceted than Diaz who came across like a one trick pony. Diaz could have made better attempts to cut off the ring and that could have been a game changer-but he didn't. There was one point in the 4th round I thought Condit should have buried the accelerator and tried to finish Diaz, he was stunned and appeared to be running out of gas. Never did I think Diaz had Condit in any danger.
I agree with much of what Mongoose says regarding a point system which rewards not engaging and out-pointing opponents. I believe it's bad for the sport but who knows how much violence the UFC really wants on its hands with their bid for national exposure on major TV networks. The funny thing is both GSP & Condit are trained by Greg Jackson and now appear to fight similar styles. While not exciting, it's hard to argue with the results-they are both winning championships.
These two fighters, GSP & Condit are products of a very nebulous scoring system at best. Until scoring is clearly defined and consistently rendered, things like aggression and ring generalship may not be given credence over good defense. What is the real value of a takedown if you are stood up? This isn't the first time I've felt this way after a fight, after-all I am a huge GSP fan. I guess what I'm trying to say is, if the scoring system remains unchanged....then so will the fighting and results.
I believe he won with striking & leg kicks while avoiding damage from Diaz. The UFC is a sport which requires athletes to evolve, and Condit clearly showed he can evolve as well as any top mixed martial artist. Condit can bang, he chose to follow this game-plan knowing he was more multi-faceted than Diaz who came across like a one trick pony. Diaz could have made better attempts to cut off the ring and that could have been a game changer-but he didn't. There was one point in the 4th round I thought Condit should have buried the accelerator and tried to finish Diaz, he was stunned and appeared to be running out of gas. Never did I think Diaz had Condit in any danger.
I agree with much of what Mongoose says regarding a point system which rewards not engaging and out-pointing opponents. I believe it's bad for the sport but who knows how much violence the UFC really wants on its hands with their bid for national exposure on major TV networks. The funny thing is both GSP & Condit are trained by Greg Jackson and now appear to fight similar styles. While not exciting, it's hard to argue with the results-they are both winning championships.
These two fighters, GSP & Condit are products of a very nebulous scoring system at best. Until scoring is clearly defined and consistently rendered, things like aggression and ring generalship may not be given credence over good defense. What is the real value of a takedown if you are stood up? This isn't the first time I've felt this way after a fight, after-all I am a huge GSP fan. I guess what I'm trying to say is, if the scoring system remains unchanged....then so will the fighting and results.
I've said it too many times. Greg Jackson is everything that's wrong with modern MMA.
__________________
Q. What do you call a Dallas Cowboy with a Super Bowl ring?
A. Old
I don't care if this one violates the TOS
everyone at my ladyfriend's parents' house *****ed about the decision of that fight. they are all big Diaz fans though. i told them flat out "drop your fandom for a second and judge it based on the rules as they sit, and he lost. if you want to argue the *********** nature of the points system, then i 100% agree with you. its the points system that is wrong, not Condit. his corner studied Diaz, and Condit did exactly what he had to do to get past Diaz and onto GSP"
with that said, they need to severely change the points system and get guys back to fighting instead of scoring.
First, I can't put my fandom to the side in this case. I've tried, and I can't. Too big a Diaz fan.
That said, I still think he won the fight based on the current criteria. If one of the criteria is "octagon control", and neither fighter is doing significant damage to the other, you have to lean to the guy who is trying to make a fight and walking the other dude all around the cage.
Diaz was landing the harder shots in 1, 2, and 3. In the 4th, he seemed to be trying to get Condit to fight by being inactive and letting him hit him. In the 5th, I think Diaz was losing the round until he got Condit's back and almost finished him, so Diaz gets the 5th.
Reaching out with your leg to touch the other guy's leg isn't a significant enough event to win a fight, unless absolutely nothing else happened. In this case, something else did happen: Diaz chased Condit all over the octagon looking to fight, which is octagon control, which is a specified judging criteria under the current messed up rules.
Then there's this, which Twentynnn brought up: if you are an MMA fighter with a career of finishing fights, and you hyped this fight up as a "dog fight" that won't end until someone is destroyed, etc. (like Condit did), and during the fight you are open-hand ***** slapped and rather than retaliating you run away, then you deserve to lose the fight.
First, I can't put my fandom to the side in this case. I've tried, and I can't. Too big a Diaz fan.
That said, I still think he won the fight based on the current criteria. If one of the criteria is "octagon control", and neither fighter is doing significant damage to the other, you have to lean to the guy who is trying to make a fight and walking the other dude all around the cage.
Diaz was landing the harder shots in 1, 2, and 3. In the 4th, he seemed to be trying to get Condit to fight by being inactive and letting him hit him. In the 5th, I think Diaz was losing the round until he got Condit's back and almost finished him, so Diaz gets the 5th.
Reaching out with your leg to touch the other guy's leg isn't a significant enough event to win a fight, unless absolutely nothing else happened. In this case, something else did happen: Diaz chased Condit all over the octagon looking to fight, which is octagon control, which is a specified judging criteria under the current messed up rules.
Then there's this, which Twentynnn brought up: if you are an MMA fighter with a career of finishing fights, and you hyped this fight up as a "dog fight" that won't end until someone is destroyed, etc. (like Condit did), and during the fight you are open-hand ***** slapped and rather than retaliating you run away, then you deserve to lose the fight.
If moving forward was a factor in scoring a fight, Roy Nelson would have won at least one round.
What I mean is that Condit controlled the Octagon by not letting Nick back him into the cage and beat on him like he does to so many of his opponents. Condit's lateral movement kept Nick from planting is feet and going off on him, except for that one really good combo against the cage in the second.
__________________
Q. What do you call a Dallas Cowboy with a Super Bowl ring?
A. Old
I don't care if this one violates the TOS
If moving forward was a factor in scoring a fight, Roy Nelson would have won at least one round.
What I mean is that Condit controlled the Octagon by not letting Nick back him into the cage and beat on him like he does to so many of his opponents. Condit's lateral movement kept Nick from planting is feet and going off on him, except for that one really good combo against the cage in the second.
It's not just moving forward. Roy Nelson moved forward into knees of destruction. Had Roy moved forward and then something essentially equal happened when he got there, then yeah you give Roy the rounds. But when Roy got there, he got tore up. The critical factor in Condit - Diaz is that nothing truly one-sided happened in the few moments where Nick finally caught Carlos. Some exchanges were won by both guys, but I think you could argue that the harder shots were landed by Diaz.
When no fight happens, you have to look more favorably on the guy who tried to make the fight.
Condit controlled not being stuck on the cage, true. But you can't stop a guy who truly wants to run away. It's not like it's a ring with 90* angles. Condit was just less afraid with looking like a sissy than anybody else; that's not ring generalship. That's just Jackson brainwashing.
Its probably good Diaz lost and retired he couldn't beat GSP unfortunately and I wish he could of. I believe Condit won the fight but if it went the other way I would feel the same. Dana White always said Don't leave it in judges hands. On a better note Dustin Poirier is developing nicely a couple more fights and wins he should be ready for a title shot.
Linear Mode
