Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page:  « First  ‹ Previous  1 2 3  Next ›  Last »  (3 total)
07:25 PM on 02/05/2012
If anyone reading this article hasn't seen the fight themselves, they really should. Omar seems to very biased here, and is clearly not looking at the statistics and facts of this fight. Condit threw more significant strikes and landed a higher percentage of strikes than Diaz. When has that ever happened before? Condit also landed a UFC record number of leg kicks, and had less visible damage on his face afterwards. Diaz employed good forward movement, as is his style. Condit played his game perfectly against Diaz, and wasn't about to lose this fight just so you could see an entertaining TKO from Nick. Anyway's, it was a great fight and both fighters should be proud of their performances. I scored it 3-2 for Carlos
05:02 PM on 02/08/2012
so if your opinion is that Condit won...which I dont agree with...do you also think Koschek deserved to won? if so, you are contradicting yourself!
07:51 AM on 02/09/2012
I agree wholeheartedly. I also scored the fight 3-2 to Condit but I would be absolutely fine with 3-2 Diaz as well, it was super close. I would be careful calling upon statistics, since the amount of shots landed is not the significant factor in the fight. One other significant factor is controlling where the fight takes places and that is pretty subjective. Did Diaz control the fight by pushing the action or did Condit control the most by circling and restarting in the centre of the cage?

Either way, NH above is right. If you haven't watched the fight you ought not to take the author's word for. It was a lot closer than he made out.

http://jim-ma.blogspot.com/
07:20 PM on 02/05/2012
What an ignorant article. The author makes no mention of striking. Would Carlos be the loser if he knocked Nick out in the latter part of the 5th, because Carlos was "backtracking" the entire fight. No, of course not, because knockout trumps stalking. The same is true of striking. More effective striking always trumps stalking. Anyone can stalk, but if your constantly getting hit in the face, what's to gain? The author must have have a few too many.
07:18 PM on 02/05/2012
The same Condit fan posted here over and over. It's painfully obvious by his inability to spell. Who spells the word "won" as "one"? A first grader? "apart" as "a part". You are embarassing yourself. Stick to activities with crayons.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
DonnieReillyMMA
Astrotrain is the best Decepticon!
09:03 PM on 02/06/2012
There are Diaz fans posting here on every discussion tangent saying the exact same stuff. Spelling is "won" thing (lol), but what are you mad at someone for - over-participating in a discussion?
11:05 PM on 02/06/2012
Under multiple names...are you really so bored you're going to defend that?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
DonnieReillyMMA
Astrotrain is the best Decepticon!
07:03 PM on 02/05/2012
Condit outstruck Diaz by at least 50 strikes. Throwing missed punches and walking forwards isn't supposed to win MMA fights; the person who wrote this "breakdown" clearly lacks knowledge and is (hopefully) a fan who hasn't followed the sport for very long. Condit unambiguously won the fight, being evasive and landing more shots is the entire point of technical kickboxing. Should Roy Jones Jr. have lost his boxing matches because he avoided his opponents and made them chase him? Ridiculous.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
12:09 AM on 02/06/2012
exactly! like i said earlier...Lyoto Machida never would have won a fight if these peeps were judges. "And winner by knockout, Lyo...oh what..wait...im sorry...the ref's decision has actually been over turned by the Judges Omar and Al on the part that he was being too elusive so it was an illegal fight...Thank you for watching WTF 143"
12:33 PM on 02/06/2012
mma isn't boxing...nor is it scored as boxing anywhere in the world other than here in North America. the objective is to submit or ko a fighter...if all fighters fight in a way to jab and run...this sport will be finished. I watched the press conference after the fight and a brazilian reporter asked Dana White why the UFC uses boxing judges...who have no idea about other disciplines (jiu jitsu, tae kwon do, wrestling...) and therefore don't have the knowledge and culture of mma to understand how to judge. Condit did well and he ran...backpeddled and sure...he got many strikes in and scored points. how would you feel if all fighter fought only to score points and there was never any intent to finish their opponent...as Condit did? Nick has every reason to feel frustrated...many other top names in the mma industry agree...Pat Miletich, Chuck Liddell, Anderson Silva to name a few all scored Nick as the winner...who's ridiculous here?
06:07 PM on 02/06/2012
Condit landed more power punches than Diaz. While he may not have been going for the finish every second, he certainly wasn't holding back when he was going for the head. Sure, some of the leg kicks were on the weaker side, but given that Diaz's style is to throw 2-5 low power punches to throw off his opponent followed by a couple power shots, the argument seems lacking. And let's not forget that neither of these guys gets stopped very often.

I didn't see Diaz trying to finish the fight all that much either. He is a marathon runner and yet he showed no urgency in engaging Condit. He did not even try to cut him off as he circled away. Diaz has these skills. He has worked on his Muay Thai. He can throw kicks and check kicks. He just refuses to do it.

This is a full contact combat sport, not a game of punchies. Condit engaged a lot. Diaz refused to even try unless it was on his terms. That's why he lost.
06:24 PM on 02/05/2012
Dude was not watching the same fight I saw.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
06:16 PM on 02/05/2012
Wow...i guess we are lucky this writer isn't a judge. I watched that fight and saw two things. 1: Carlos Condit isn't one dimentional (found openings and used a variety of strikes to exploit them and get the win). 2: Nick Diaz has nothing in the stand up if the opponent doesn't stand in front of him against the cage. You watch this fight and you saw two fighters with a game plan with neither one detering from what their plan was. One of these plans would make an interim champion. Now obviously this writer is either a big Diaz fan writing multiple excuses for the outcome of the fight or just doesnt know what he is talking about and has probably been knocked out alot himself, cause he thinks a real fight is standing in front of someone thats trying to kick the crap out of you. You are actually disrespecting Diaz (if you are a fan) by complaining that Condit wouldn't stand still in front of him so he could win. The reality is that Nick diaz with all the skills and experience he possesses as a fighter should have recognized that his normal bully tactic wasn't working and that he was losing the fight and should have adapted and evolved his tactics to beat this fighter. He didn't he just kept marching from one side of the ring to the other in hopes that Condit would stay put against the cage to beat on him.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Al Nava
Working-class Revolutionary Leader
06:01 PM on 02/05/2012
Nick Diaz robbed by the scoring judges, who are either stupid, blind, or corrupt. Diaz won rounds one, two, and five, while Condit only won round 4. I do blame Diaz for not tapping-out Condit and leaving it up to the judges.

Only ignorant or stupid people believe that Condit won. Even Anderson Silva, Chuck Liddell, Jens Pulver, Matt Lindland, Ronda Rousey, and many other MMA fighters said that Diaz won.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
DonnieReillyMMA
Astrotrain is the best Decepticon!
10:45 PM on 02/05/2012
According to FightMetric, Condit outlanded Diaz by six significant strikes in round 1, ten in round 3, TWENTY FIVE in round 4 and 8 in round five. Diaz lost total and significant strikes in four rounds, only winning round 2 by three significant strikes (6 total). He had one takedown in round 5 that yielded only backmount and nothing else. In what way did Diaz "win" the fight to the extent that anyone who believes otherwise (including sites that score fights professionally) is automatically worthy of contempt?

Please explain to me how walking forwards and saying "hit me, bitch!" scores points? Is that some section of the UFC criteria I wasn't aware of? I like Nick and Nate a lot, but Diaz lost the fight. The stats don't lie and almost FIFTY more significant strikes for condit, plus 4 rounds of more and harder shots landed in four out of five rounds is all you need for scoring in a fight that had only one go-nowhere takedown.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
11:53 PM on 02/05/2012
Well obviously highlight reel knockout striker fighters are gonna frown upon an elusive fighter. They want to see someone stand there and get punched out, and hate having to chase or get taken down by an elusive or grappling fighter. Though i guess we don't have to mention they are all friends either. It's kind of humerous really to think that you guys must think Lyoto Machida lost to Tito Ortiz cause he didn't stay put also. I think honesty should play a part in all this controversy and peeps should just admit that they are just mad that the fight wasn't what they expected. It wasnt what I expected either, but Diaz definitely lost and it was his own fault. there was plenty of time to adjust the game plan. Not to mention EVERY fighter knows not to let it goto the judges; and with Diaz outspokenly boasting he is better than every fighter in the UFC (i'm assuming he meant weight division but actually said "everyone in here"); he should have ended the fight quickly. Especially with all the tools and experience he has at his disposal.
03:37 AM on 02/06/2012
Stop with the drugs and take all future mma events off the Tivo, cause you don't have a clue.
05:57 PM on 02/05/2012
Haha this writer needs to go to spec savers ..Being a diaz fan myself I was disappointed at his performance . He struggled to land any strikes and his take down and submission attempts in the final round was the only thing to get me up out of my chair . I wish he had of tried to shoot in for the take down earlier in the fight but full credit to Condit he clearly won the fight . Great game plan and his strikes are beautiful to watch .
12:53 AM on 02/06/2012
I love Nick Diaz, but he lost the fight. Joe Rogan and Mike Goldberg agree, so did Dana White. Carlos had a great game plan, one I've never seen him employ before, which is a testament to his flexibility and intelligence. Diaz will be back, no way he retires. He'll fight someone soon to get right back into contention and then we'll be treated to either a Nick vs. George or Nick vs. Carlos rematch.
05:51 PM on 02/05/2012
*Win in place of when for that last line.
05:49 PM on 02/05/2012
Diaz tried to cut Condit off, but Carlos would duck under punches and literally run out of the corner (occasionally he would combo his way out). Diaz didn't get "lit up" until the 3rd and 4th round. It was back and forth with both fighters landing baby shots because Condit kept on backing up so both fighters couldn't get power shots. Diaz stumbled Condit a couple of times that should have had him when those first two rounds and the last round is a no brainer going to Diaz.

Hate to see Diaz go (if he does decide to stick with his decision), but I think GSP would have had the same game plan as Condit fighting Nick while walking backwards. I just hope GSP and Condit come to fight each other rather than put on a boring performance seeing now that Condit has the potential to do that. I could also see GSP smashing Condit because he got in the way of his dream of beating on Nick.
05:34 PM on 02/05/2012
Seriously? The only problem with judging here is your inept biased opinion on how you think the fight went but let's look at the numbers as they don't lie-146 to 110 punches for Carlos, respectively. 110 to 19 kicks for Carlos, respectively. Several beautiful, crisp combinations landed in every round by Condit as compared to Diaz landing 1 or 2 each round with little accuracy and little to no damage or effect.

Aggression and Octagon Control I would hand towards Diaz but that means jack when your opponent out strikes and out smarts you while implementing his own game plan. Diaz stalked Condit the entire fight but Condit was elusive and still managed to out strike Diaz-that is a FACT and I highly suggest you learn a little more about martial arts competitions before writing (if thats truly what you believe this worthless piece of crap article is considered) such non sense. If it was Lyoto Machida in the Octagon, no one would be saying anything as his style is quite elusive.

Please do us a favor and retire from writing, your biased opinion is not in the spirit of true journalism-to report without bias and state the FACTS.
06:46 PM on 02/06/2012
I think if you read the official definition of octagon control, you have to give that to Condit. And as for agression, it only counts when it is effective, and mostly I found Diaz's "aggression" to have no effect. He wasn't walking Condit down, he was following him.

Unified Rules:
"Fighting area control is judged by determining who is dictating the pace, location and position of the bout. Examples of factors to consider are countering a grappler's attempt at takedown by remaining standing and legally striking; taking down an opponent to force a ground fight; creating threatening submission attempts, passing the guard to achieve mount, and creating striking opportunities."

from abcboxing.com/unified_mma_rules.html
05:30 PM on 02/05/2012
i had carlos winning because nick wasnt hitting him - nick was just bull rushing and mouthing off. if nick wanted to win he should have tried clinch fighting or something. what a crybaby
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Omar Baddar
05:29 PM on 02/05/2012
It's nice to know that Pat Miletich, Dan Henderson, Mark Munoz, Josh Neer & other sport experts saw it my way: http://mmanews1212.vacau.com/?p=530
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
DonnieReillyMMA
Astrotrain is the best Decepticon!
08:25 PM on 02/05/2012
Great way to "respond" to criticism, hiding behind "experts" and not the actual statistics of what happened in the fight.

You can find plenty of "experts" - including former and current fighters - to disagree with every relatively close decision, so having four people involved in the sport who agree with you isn't particularly noteworthy.

Look at the majority (and possibly ALL) of the well-reasoned comments here - why not try to engage with them instead rather than posting an offsite link that means little? Weak, IMO
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Omar Baddar
08:56 PM on 02/05/2012
Diaz was outstruck in rounds 3 & 4. As Pat Miletich correctly points out, "Overall punch stats do not decide rounds. Winning a round decides rounds." Diaz won rounds 1 and 2 even by Dana White's count, and Diaz should have won round 5 by taking Condit to the ground, getting his back and placing him in a body triangle (virtually the most dominant position in MMA), and nearly finishing him with a submission attempt (only he made any attempt to actually finish the fight). That's my case on substance.

I wish you knew how silly you sound when you say "hiding behind 'experts'." If someone disagreed with me about global warming, I would cite where the scientific community stood, not so much to "hide" as to back up my position. Likewise, when your allegedly "well-seasoned" friends here claim that I must've been watching a different fight, citing the agreement of a fair number of UFC fighters and MMA experts with me is a perfectly legit response.
09:07 PM on 02/05/2012
According to the rules under 'Effective Aggressiveness': 2. Throwing a strike moving backwards is not as effective as a strike thrown moving forward.
Therefore Condit's strikes while moving backwards (the majority?) should not be given the same weight as Diaz's strikes. Compustrike doesn't take that into account.
06:58 PM on 02/06/2012
And Ben Henderson, Dana White, Bas Rutten and many other sports experts thought Condit won (and Bas is a huge Diaz fan). What's your point?
05:23 PM on 02/05/2012
Not only did Condit outstrike Diaz by a large margin, he dictated the terms of the fight. It's not Condit's job to stand and trade with Diaz, it's Diaz's job to force Condit to stand with him or take him down. He didn't cut off the cage and couldn't engage him.

And to think Diaz wants to go into boxing, where he'll see even more of this.
05:12 PM on 02/05/2012
This backlash is getting tiring... as someone writing about the sport I agree with you that judges need a lot of work in learning how to score fights better, particularly fights where guys are mounting no offensive attack and win the fight... this was not one of those fights. Yea, Diaz came forward... and got lit up, Condit had him beat in the over all strikes landed, even set a record for most leg strikes landed. Kaleb Starnes running is totally different than this fight.

If Condit decides that standing in front of Diaz is bad strategy and that rather than doing that he'll bring it back to the center and land a punch to the face, low kick with the left and follow it up with a high kick than that's him working his game plan. Control of the Octagon doesn't happen when you're game plan is not effective, walk forward land a couple and eat a bunch the whole night... that shouldn't win you a fight.

Lastly where is Diaz in this? Why didn't he cut him off and ko Condit. Why didn't he shoot for a leg or use his clinch game against the fence like he did against BJ Penn? Diaz lost cause he didn't adapt or try anything new, he just got slower and lit up as the fight went on. Do pitchers get booed on by sports fans for throwing shut out's?