The Ultimate fighter 13 Finale - LIVE DISCUSSION

[Camdemonium]

It takes a lot of skill to be able to stay out of a sub and keep that pressure on the ground. It's MMA no Kickboxing. There is more than one way to win. I appreciate all aspects of this sport. Guida is in your face the whole time pushing you to the brink every single second. That is fun to watch to me. Pettis didn't do anything either. That's why the judges had such a lopsided score.

I think you are delusional. The only thing significant in that fight was the constant submission attempts from the BOTTOM by Showtime. Clay Guida laid and prayed his way to another victory. I love how everyone says "He's pushing the pace." or "He's relentless!" or "Octagon Control" (whatever that means) when what they should be saying is "How does he win fights despite doing no damage?"

I mean isn't that the goal, to finish fights? I guess winning on points is still winning.

I mean another example was Kampann-Sanchez. I mean I like aggression but that was ludicrous. Did you see Diego's face?

The funny thing is I like every single one of your posts except this one. Don't try and feed me a line of bull saying that Guida was trying to finish the fight, or he deserved that win because that's ridiculous. I understand the it's up to Pettis to keep the fight standing then but still you have no admit that Guida did NOTHING from the top. I think I saw one elbow... maybe... I mean even Couture does more than that. We can agree to disagree though.

[bogbat]

really? Ramsey was eating jabs in my opinion, but I was most surprised by the improvement of Chris Cope tonight. He really took advantage of his time in the spotlight.

Ramsey landed 2 significant power shots. Regardless, Ferguson won and most of us cashed

[FindTheLock]

I think you are delusional. The only thing significant in that fight was the constant submission attempts from the BOTTOM by Showtime. Clay Guida laid and prayed his way to another victory. I love how everyone says "He's pushing the pace." or "He's relentless!" or "Octagon Control" (whatever that means) when what they should be saying is "How does he win fights despite doing no damage?"

I mean isn't that the goal, to finish fights? I guess winning on points is still winning.

I mean another example was Kampann-Sanchez. I mean I like aggression but that was ludicrous. Did you see Diego's face?

The funny thing is I like every single one of your posts except this one. Don't try and feed me a line of bull saying that Guida was trying to finish the fight, or he deserved that win because that's ridiculous. I understand the it's up to Pettis to keep the fight standing then but still you have no admit that Guida did NOTHING from the top. I think I saw one elbow... maybe... I mean even Couture does more than that. We can agree to disagree though.

hey, I am perfectly capable of appreciating another persons opinion that differs from my own. I guess when it comes to that style of fighting we just have different perspectives . I thought Pettis had an excellent guard and even though Guida was trying to pass he couldn't because of how good Pettis was off his back. He is an excellent fighter and will get more stoppages than Guida in his career. Guida just has a style that wins points with the judges, and I appreciate watching the skills he uses to win. I love watching two grapplers trying to out grapple each other just as much as I enjoy watching two strikers trying to Knock each others heads off.

[Kaladarus]

Guida is with Greg Jackson's camp and his camp does what they need to do to win no matter how boring it is. MMA and fighting are two different things. MMA is all about winning and not about finishing your opponent. If the match goes the distance you win based on judging criteria. Fans got to understand they are not watching fights. They are watching MMA matches.

[brooks85]

I know ive said it before but the idea of "surviving" a submission or punches should not win you rounds. "Having a heart, being relentless" and these other animal qualities we've labeled should not win you points. They make for great stories but they should have little to do with judging a fight. Hearing rogan talk like the fight was exciting was painful.

Guida wanted nothing to do standing with pettis and that's fine. Once on the ground he offered nothing tho. Pettis constantly had wrist control, attempted multiple submissions and landed better shots off his back in round 1 and 2 than guida.

Though the result didn't surprise me, watching it happen is still annoying.

[Varker]

I was expecting pettis to stop takedowns better, he was basically getting taken down at will.

[darko3131]

Rough night for Pettis. He would have been on his way to a title shot and superstardom but Guida is a tough nut to crack. Guida gets a title shot now?

[FindTheLock]

I guess my question would be to anyone who disagrees with that decision is, how do you reward a guy for laying on his back and defending the whole time? Guida pushed the pace and controlled where the fight was going the whole time. being good at BJJ is great for self defense, but if you're a judge you have to give the nod to the guy who is controlling the fight. Some of the decisions I do disagree with in MMA, but this one isn't one of them. I mean you have to score it no worse than a Guida win or a draw. There is no way you can claim Guida lost this fight, not rationally anyway.

[brooks85]

because pettis was not defending, he was attacking.

It is pretty obvious to me who was in defense mode throughout the fight.

[FindTheLock]

I think sometimes the Bias of having money on a fight clouds judgment. I will just agree to disagree.

[Jordan23]

You are right. Sometimes having money on a fight can cloud judgement but that doesn't take away from the fact that Guida wasn't trying to finish more like just trying to not get finished. It wasn't an exciting fight. I hope we get to see Jeremy Stephens vs. Anthony Pettis! I think that will be an awesome fight.

[bogbat]

I guess my question would be to anyone who disagrees with that decision is, how do you reward a guy for laying on his back and defending the whole time? Guida pushed the pace and controlled where the fight was going the whole time. being good at BJJ is great for self defense, but if you're a judge you have to give the nod to the guy who is controlling the fight. Some of the decisions I do disagree with in MMA, but this one isn't one of them. I mean you have to score it no worse than a Guida win or a draw. There is no way you can claim Guida lost this fight, not rationally anyway.

Let me ask, did you have money on Guida?

What is your definition of pushing the pace exactly? I don't see how he pushed the pace in this fight, he got take downs and for the most part he was in fending off Pettis's submission attempts. Yes Guida controlled where the fight went and octagon control is one of the judges criteria but I'm not so convinced he even scored that. Here is the rule:

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.

I need to watch the fight again but I'll try to break this aspect down from memory.

Once again, there's that word pace. How do we judge pace here? Clay sure bounces around on the feet but I think they are looking for effective pace. Since most of the fight occurred on the ground we need to determine who dictated the pace there. For the most part Pettis dictated the pace on the ground because he was the one forcing Guida to defend against his submission attempts. Next is location and position of the bout which goes to Clay. Guida forced the ground fight but the only one attempting submissions was Pettis. Guida was not able to pass Pettis's guard and as for striking opportunities it seemed to me that Pettis landed the more significant strikes off of his back.

To sum it up:
Pace: Pettis
Location and positions: Guida
Submission attempts: Pettis
Creating striking opportunites: Pettis

So there we have it, straight from the rule book. Pettis-3 Guida-1. fighting area (octagon) control goes to Pettis.

[GoGoGadget]

I don't want to get involved but clearly Guida controlled the octagon, he put Pettis on the mat where he wanted him and humped him and landed a few shoulder shots in 3 rounds

[FindTheLock]

Let me ask, did you have money on Guida?

What is your definition of pushing the pace exactly? I don't see how he pushed the pace in this fight, he got take downs and for the most part he was in fending off Pettis's submission attempts. Yes Guida controlled where the fight went and octagon control is one of the judges criteria but I'm not so convinced he even scored that. Here is the rule:



I need to watch the fight again but I'll try to break this aspect down from memory.

Once again, there's that word pace. How do we judge pace here? Clay sure bounces around on the feet but I think they are looking for effective pace. Since most of the fight occurred on the ground we need to determine who dictated the pace there. For the most part Pettis dictated the pace on the ground because he was the one forcing Guida to defend against his submission attempts. Next is location and position of the bout which goes to Clay. Guida forced the ground fight but the only one attempting submissions was Pettis. Guida was not able to pass Pettis's guard and as for striking opportunities it seemed to me that Pettis landed the more significant strikes off of his back.

To sum it up:
Pace: Pettis
Location and positions: Guida
Submission attempts: Pettis
Creating striking opportunites: Pettis

So there we have it, straight from the rule book. Pettis-3 Guida-1. fighting area (octagon) control goes to Pettis.

Answer- no I didn't bet on any of those fights, and luckily for me. I liked chuck to win the best and I would've got killed on that bet alone. I am just a huge fan of the sport who occasionally bets on fights when I feel really good about a fighter. I am giving a totally unbiased point of view when discussing the match ups. I like this site because people here know what they are talking about and they discuss match ups during and after the fight. I mainly only bet big money on football season. College football is my favorite.

a simple rebuttal for me to explain my perspective with a question is this. Would you propose a scoring system in which Guida lost that fight based on what you witnessed? If the answer is yes then I would argue that such a scoring system would be even more flawed then the one they are currently using.


I also do not agree that sub attempts should be scored any better than sub defense. Just like a take down attempt shouldn't get scored more than a defended take down.

[cheeese]

Pettis shouldn't be rewarded any more for those submission attempts than he should if he threw a 3 punch combo that was all blocked. He never got anything on Guida. He made Guida work to maintain position and not get subbed but that's not enough to win the round.

[Vaughany]

wow what a bad night. Oneil, pettis, grispi, edwards, whats up! -15 units. worst event profit wise since autumn 2010. jesus.

Same here bro, didn't bode well after the dodgey Edwards decision

[bogbat]

Answer- no I didn't bet on any of those fights, and luckily for me. I liked chuck to win the best and I would've got killed on that bet alone. I am just a huge fan of the sport who occasionally bets on fights when I feel really good about a fighter. I am giving a totally unbiased point of view when discussing the match ups. I like this site because people here know what they are talking about and they discuss match ups during and after the fight. I mainly only bet big money on football season. College football is my favorite. a simple rebuttal for me to explain my perspective with a question is this. Would you propose a scoring system in which Guida lost that fight based on what you witnessed? If the answer is yes then I would argue that such a scoring system would be even more flawed then the one they are currently using. I also do not agree that sub attempts should be scored any better than sub defense. Just like a take down attempt shouldn't get scored more than a defended take down.

I'm not proposing a system here. I'm not even saying that Pettis won the fight. First time though I probably would have scored it a draw with the first round 10-10, second 10-9 Pettis and the third 10-9 Guida.

I'm mainly trying to express that under the current rule-set octagon control isn't what most people think it is. The case you're making for Guida is that he won because he controlled the pace and won the octagon control. The way I interpret the rules (as I stated in my post above) is that even though Clay kept the fight on the ground he wasn't really in control and where the fight takes place isn't the only factor when judging octagon control.

Cheese, under the current rules submission attempts are rewarded.

Here is another extract from the unified rules of mixed martial arts:

Effective grappling is judged by considering the amount of successful executions of a
legal takedown and reversals. Examples of factors to consider are take downs from
standing position to mount position, passing the guard to mount position, and bottom
position fighters using an active, threatening guard.

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.

As you can see, having a threatening guard and attempting threatening submissions is supposed to be rewarded.

You might say that those submissions weren't threatening but I think a couple of those triangle attempts were certainly threatening, as was the arm-bar attempt at the end of round two.

[Vaughany]

I have tears in my eyes from that Maldonado fight and am still feeling the burn of losing my parlay thanks to Grispi. Not sure I want to watch this on a big screen.

Have even cracked into the boxed cooking wine as a day like today doesn't deserve anything good. Lost my tennis bet by the hook yet again and I just lost a bet on a guy that even my untrained eye thought he'd won.

Welcome to MMA betting!

[Vaughany]

ok guys O'niel messed up all my parlays ..

however I still profited $391 tonight .. not a bad night .. how did u guys do .. hope u all won something .

tough night though

U said u profited $640 on another page, do you just throw random numbers out!??

[FindTheLock]

I'm not proposing a system here. I'm not even saying that Pettis won the fight. First time though I probably would have scored it a draw with the first round 10-10, second 10-9 Pettis and the third 10-9 Guida.

I'm mainly trying to express that under the current rule-set octagon control isn't what most people think it is. The case you're making for Guida is that he won because he controlled the pace and won the octagon control. The way I interpret the rules (as I stated in my post above) is that even though Clay kept the fight on the ground he wasn't really in control and where the fight takes place isn't the only factor when judging octagon control.

Cheese, under the current rules submission attempts are rewarded.

Here is another extract from the unified rules of mixed martial arts:

As you can see, having a threatening guard and attempting threatening submissions is supposed to be rewarded.

You might say that those submissions weren't threatening but I think a couple of those triangle attempts were certainly threatening, as was the arm-bar attempt at the end of round two.

Well we can go round and round arguing semantics, but I think it would be best to just say we both have different points of view when it comes to judging fights. I can agree that a lot of MMA fights are not judged properly, but In my humble opinion this isn't one of those fights. I do agree some rules need to be changed, but I wouldn't agree with any rule book that didn't have Guida winning this fight.

[bjpenn85]

I know, at the same time, i got those money back with kingsbury. How bad was your night?

[bogbat]

Well we can go round and round arguing semantics, but I think it would be best to just say we both have different points of view when it comes to judging fights. I can agree that a lot of MMA fights are not judged properly, but In my humble opinion this isn't one of those fights. I do agree some rules need to be changed, but I wouldn't agree with any rule book that didn't have Guida winning this fight.

Semantics? This is the whole problem with the current state of MMA judging. MMA is a sport, and like any other sport it has a rule-set. You're disregarding the rules and judging the fight on how you think it should be judged. This is why there is so much variance with judges score cards, instead of following the rules they bring their personal opinion of how they think fights should be judged into it.

[FindTheLock]

Semantics? This is the whole problem with the current state of MMA judging. MMA is a sport, and like any other sport it has a rule-set. You're disregarding the rules and judging the fight on how you think it should be judged. This is why there is so much variance with judges score cards, instead of following the rules they bring their personal opinion of how they think fights should be judged into it.

How much did you lose betting on this fight? That kick off the cage was very impressive, but tonight he didn't land anything or score any points on anybody's score cards. I think the only people complaining about that particular decision are the ones who lost money betting on the hype train that just got derailed. Maybe you thought it was boring, but the 30-27 unanimous decision was the final score on the cards. All three judges gave Guida all three rounds. There is no disputing that. what part of agreeing to disagree are you having trouble with? I am just trying to be nice and respectful here haha

[bjpenn85]

I lost a lot of money on pettis. He clearly lost that fight. Guida may be the next champ, who can stop that guys pace or control? He clearly can avoid submssions, his striking and movement is good enough to dont get hit. And he may after all be one of the friendliest champions in ufc history, he doesnt hurt his opponents

[rocky mattioli]

i said in another thread that i thought that this was lousy,shortsighted matchmaking on the ufc`s part....and i understand the arguments on the other side....but when you have a hot,exciting commodity ready to fight for a title,i just think it`s not the smatest move putting him in with a top control grinder like guida.....

we all know how important takedowns and top control are in mma judging(particularly the ufc)..fair or not,if we are all aware of this situation,i`m sure the fighters and their camps at the highest levels are aware.....it`s a bone of contention for many of us(particularly when top control isn`t used to score points).....and i`m sure that pettis and his crew were aware of the one way that guida could beat him....the only way...

but,it looked as though pettis thought he could throw his jock in there and win...maybe he became overenamored of his highlight reel k.o. of henderson......maybe it went to his head....but you don`t go into a fight with guida using a bunch of fancy kicks and flashy moves that leave you open to takedowns....guida`s plenty tough and persistent enough without his opponent opening the door for him...makes you wonder if pettis would hold the flashlight for a burglar ransacking his home....


so,your flashy "star-to be" goes to the way of the buggywhip(end of the line),losing to a top level gatekeeper(guida`s good at what he does,but he`s extremely limited) ...and i`m reading that guida is behind guillard and miller for a title bout....well,that worked out well...lol

i just don`t see the upside for the ufc...pettis is a bit of a rarity in mma...he`s uber-talented and flashy with an extremely fan-friendly style.......i think it was a blunder.......i understand that pettis requested guida...but that`s dana`s job.....it`s a business... i don`t see the upside here....when you get a hot commodity,you have to be a little smart...throw him in with a mid-level striker that will make for an exciting fight with the potential for another highlight reel k.o...build the pettis brand....

some might differ...and that`s cool....dana obviously differed with me.....the oddsmakers were aware of how dangerous guida was for pettis...

maybe it`s me...i just never saw the upside here...and yes,pettis cost me a parlay(one of my numerous froch/johnson over 9.5`s..lol)....i really thought he`d fight a little smarter...a little more conservatively.....get the win and keep the ball rolling....

don`t beat me up...just my opinion....


btw...that johnson/froch over 9.5 at a little over -300 was a gift....personally,i have trouble laying -300 on the sun coming up(that`s my flaw) so i didn`t capitalize on it like i should have....thank god for 5 dimes and the parlay option...and kudos to froch for trying to finish...the guy is pretty impressive...


i`m looking for opinions on einemo/herman....intersting fight...interesting card next week....

[FightFightFight]

Pettis actually chose Guida to fight. Oops.

[rocky502]

Pettis shouldn't be rewarded any more for those submission attempts than he should if he threw a 3 punch combo that was all blocked. He never got anything on Guida. He made Guida work to maintain position and not get subbed but that's not enough to win the round.

Cheeese nailed it here. How much credit should a fighter get for attempting submissions and failing? I have long said that too much credit is given for takedowns. I feel equal consideration should be given to a fighter who gets taken down and then immediately escapes back to the feet without taking damage. Pettis failed to stop takedowns, failed to sweep, failed at catching Guida in a submission, and failed to force stand-ups. I don't give Pettis any points for being able to hold onto Guida's wrist while laying on his back.

Look, Pettis knew what he had to do against Guida to beat him. He underestimated Guida's ability or overestimated his ability to stop him. Either way, though it nay not have been the most exciting win, Guida executed his game plan of taking Pettis down and keeping it there. I see no other possible outcome for the judges than a 30-27 win for Guida.

[snake11eyes]

No doubt Guida wins this decision. Kind of reminded me of mouse/torres last week. Anytime a fighter gets a takedown in each round and stays on top for the whole round it doesn't matter what the bottom fighter does he can't win.

[THE_LOCKSMITH]

Pettis knew what Guida was abiout the takedowns and he couldn't stop them. That basically sums up the fight

[jesuseatsnubs]

U said u profited $640 on another page, do you just throw random numbers out!??

I thought I explained this .. I profited $391 when the Brazilian and Kyle went over 2.5 rounds .. and I profited when Tony Ferguson won his fight ..

so $640 in profits in total .. not a bad night lol

[brooks85]

Pettis shouldn't be rewarded any more for those submission attempts than he should if he threw a 3 punch combo that was all blocked. He never got anything on Guida. He made Guida work to maintain position and not get subbed but that's not enough to win the round.

but laying on top and doing nothing but defending should?


Ill take the guy who is actually fighting, that is who i want to see win every time.

[jesuseatsnubs]

you Anthony pettis nut huggers need to stop .. I watched that fight live and lost that fight for sure .. It does not matter what Guida did .. the fact is he still won the fight dominantly .. this is MMA after all .. not a stand up war like boxing .. give credit where it's due .. Guida was that much better fighter last night .

[Kaladarus]

I don't know how any of those submissions were threatening. I was on Guida and I wasn't even remotely worried about any of those submission attempts. If anything you should lose points for unsuccessful submission attempts kind of like you lose points for unsuccessful takedowns. If Pettis wanted to win he should of put himself in a position to win. It was obvious to me that he had no chance at all of submitting Guida and that he was just wasting time on the ground. If he wanted to score points he should have got off the floor and landed something. Guida landed more every single round, took the fight where he wanted it and pushed the pace. There was no round that wasn't clearly a 10-9. I guarantee you if that fight was to happen all over again Pettis would completely change his game plan.

[Vaughany]

ok guys O'niel messed up all my parlays ..

however I still profited $391 tonight .. not a bad night .. how did u guys do .. hope u all won something .

tough night though

I thought I explained this .. I profited $391 when the Brazilian and Kyle went over 2.5 rounds .. and I profited when Tony Ferguson won his fight ..

so $640 in profits in total .. not a bad night lol

Okay I see, just that you said u profited $391 after the event had finished so presumed tht included Ferguson!

[Ladle]

If anything you should lose points for unsuccessful submission attempts kind of like you lose points for unsuccessful takedowns.

Certainly not. The fighter attempting the submission is actively trying to finish the fight. They should absolutely be rewarded for that. Anything else is lunacy.

Also, since when do you lose points for unsuccessful takedowns? Remember the judging in Sanchez/Kampmann?

It was obvious to me that he had no chance at all of submitting Guida and that he was just wasting time on the ground.

Wasting time? He threw up numerous triangles, attempted several armbars, and nearly secured an armbar at one point. Yes, Guida escaped successfully every time, but he was still in jeopardy on numerous occasions. If I had money on Guida, I would have definitely been sweating it.

If he wanted to score points he should have got off the floor and landed something.

Agreed, but only because that's apparently what's necessary to satisfy the stupid judges. If you're continually putting your opponent in a position where they have to defend, you're winning the fight, even if it is off of your back. Judges totally over prioritize top control.

Guida landed more every single round, took the fight where he wanted it and pushed the pace.

He was out-landed on the feet and every time he took Pettis down he was put into a position where he was forced to defend.

Do you think Demetrious Johnson deserved the victory over Miguel Torres?

There was no round that wasn't clearly a 10-9.

Disagree. I thought Pettis won round two. Guida put forward pretty much zero offense, whereas Pettis socked him with a one-two on the feet and angled for three submissions on the ground (coming particularly close to securing an armbar on the third attempt). I also scored the first round a 10-10, and I think there's a case to be made for the final round being a 10-10 too.