joe warren/galvao decision

Vaughany · 04-17-11, 09:48 AM

ha Same...looked like being a poor night for me until tht gift! Guess it makes up for Dunham.Sherk!

Ladle · 04-17-11, 10:07 AM

It wasn't the worst decision I've ever seen, but I certainly agree that Galvao won the first two rounds. The judge who scored the second round in favour of Warren deserves to be sealed inside a crate full of jackals and razor wire. Then thrown down a hill.

ha Same...looked like being a poor night for me until tht gift! Guess it makes up for Dunham.Sherk!

True. That's why I don't get too mad about being screwed out of a bet by the judges. Somewhere down the road you'll get an equally dubious decision which works out in your favour.

teaserpleaser · 04-17-11, 10:12 AM

Chuck wolfe is the judge that had it 30-27 for warren... Guy has to be blind

sirchadwick1 · 04-17-11, 11:33 AM

The first round was pretty close in my eyes... could have gone either way. I wasn't really persuaded by the commentating. The 2nd round was clearly Galvao and the 3rd was Warren. So I don't think it was complete robbery. Maybe I need to rewatch it. If Warren had lost last night a lot of us would have been in knee deep. The 30-27 Warren call was just stupid though.

THE_LOCKSMITH · 04-17-11, 12:42 PM

yea i gave the first two rounds to Galvao, no way that was 30-27 Warren

urge2kill · 04-17-11, 12:53 PM

I really need some of what these judges are smoking. I don't get nearly high enough off bud to see what they're seeing.

snake11eyes · 04-17-11, 09:16 PM

I didnt bet warren, but I didnt think it was a horrible decision either. Like others said round 2 galvao, round 3 warren. First was close, but I gave it to galvao. I could however see 29-28 warren.

Poppa Catfish · 04-17-11, 10:09 PM

Originally posted by snake11eyes

I didnt bet warren, but I didnt think it was a horrible decision either. Like others said round 2 galvao, round 3 warren. First was close, but I gave it to galvao. I could however see 29-28 warren.

I'm in the same boat as you. I think it was a decision that they got wrong and I would have scored 29-28 Galvao, but I can sort of see a case to be made for Warren stealing the first. It also seems like every bad decision is made into the worst one ever by the fans. We have "the worst decision in MMA history" at least once a month, it gets a little old.

ShogunRua · 04-18-11, 12:39 AM

I gave Galvao the first 2 rounds also. I guess you could sort of make a case for that 1st round, but like you mentioned, the judge that ruled it 30-27. WTF is that? No way in hell Galvao lost the 2nd.

jin2daj · 04-18-11, 02:31 AM

i dididnt see the fight. were the first 2 rounds close at all? trying to be as unbiased as possible, is POSSIBLE that someone COULD have scored 30-27?

im trying to decide if its worth watching (as in a close fight that i want to decide for myself) or if its just a pure unadulterated robbery.

sirchadwick1 · 04-18-11, 05:55 AM

Originally posted by jin2daj

i dididnt see the fight. were the first 2 rounds close at all? trying to be as unbiased as possible, is POSSIBLE that someone COULD have scored 30-27?

im trying to decide if its worth watching (as in a close fight that i want to decide for myself) or if its just a pure unadulterated robbery.

Warren has a history of looking pretty bad in the 1st rd (slow starter)... in this fight he kept trying to get a takedown and it didn't work for him early when Galvao was fresh.... and Warren was the one who surprisingly ended up on his back. But he scrambled at was able to get to his feet fairly quickly. 1st rd was close and you could make an argument for either guy. 2nd not so much... Galvao definitely had the better standup, no question there. And he landed a couple nice flying knees. Warren couldn't impose his will like he normally does, so he didn't look too sharp until the 3rd when he came into his own and worked his top game which apparently sealed the W for him. I'd say it's worth watching and it's not a total robbery like Hamill/Bisping or Fukuda/Ring.

rocky502 · 04-18-11, 08:45 AM

Originally posted by jin2daj

i dididnt see the fight. were the first 2 rounds close at all? trying to be as unbiased as possible, is POSSIBLE that someone COULD have scored 30-27?

im trying to decide if its worth watching (as in a close fight that i want to decide for myself) or if its just a pure unadulterated robbery.

I would say second round was so one-sided that any reasonable person would have scored it for Galvao. The first round was closer but agree tht Galvao edged him based on ending up on top in the scrambles three or four times and Warren really got nothing done at all. Round three was Warren w/out a doubt even though he laid on him and did not do much damage. The judge that scored round two for Warren should be let go. NO WAY could you even make a case for that scoring.

jin2daj · 04-18-11, 06:07 PM

thanks to sirchadwick and rocky!

both you seem to agree with eachother in your scoring of the fight and i appreciate the unbiased analysis. i decided to take both your words on it and ill pass on finding a vid of this.

cheers

GoGoGadget · 04-18-11, 09:23 PM

These judges are a joke, Galvao clearly one the first round and yet not one judge scored the first in his favor.

Judges thinking must be hmmm Warren take down with a few seconds left in the round = winning. Duh, WINNING!