- Joined
- Feb 21, 2011
- Messages
- 18,453
- Reaction score
- 4,522
As soon as i saw who the ts was, it was pretty obvious how the thread was going
Its not though youre telling me the results of another fight doesnt matter even though all the fights are judged by literally the same rules. Looking at the fights objectively literally means nothing. Its the same rules and should be consistent
Only 12% of those same experts scored the Romero Jacare fight to Yoel...But Yoel still won the fight and got a #1 contender shot from it so....shit happens.Well considering 75% of media and people polled all think it was a draw or a win for Romero.... it would appear you are wrong.
It means everything, you judge fights objectively. There isnt an argument, especially your logical fallacy you keep using.
Under the same criteria because you want consistency. you keep saying you judge them objectively like its suppose to mean fuck all in this argument. Yes the results of another fight shouldnt sway the judge. But hes judging off a set of rules and a critieria so they should be consistent in their results. You're literally saying you cannot look at another fight as an example when you feel a fight wasnt judged correctly because its judged objectively.. its actually stupid. Its irrelevent in this discussion. Im not asking for judges to say "i gave michael jackson a 10-8 so this is a 10-8 also."
Its asking for consistency when a 10-8 is given. Youre objectively argument has no grounds here and is just a lazy cop out.
"you cant compare 2 diffetent fights."
Yes the fuck you can..
"im still stuck in my logical fallacy"
You judge fights objectively, when the judges score the fight, they do so based on that fight alone, not on how other fights may have been scored, you dolt.
The judging system is sposed to have changed recently meaning total dominance and multiple near finishes aren't needed for 10-8 anymore.
I think you might be an actual idiot now...
Yes i completely understand you judge fights objectly and do not consider the results of another fight to score the fight if youre a judge..but as a fan watching the fights there is Literally no reason to be objective about it. Its perfectly okay to ask why something got a 10-8 but why another didnt. There is no rules on having an opinion of the results of a fight. So literally what youre saying is irrelevent.. its not even an argument.. youre just saying the judges score fights objectively like its some genius relevation. Its not.
What you dont realize is that all fights are judged by the same criteria.. there should be consistency. Being judged objectively literally has nothing to do with this. if Youre objectively judging a fight under the same critiera the results should be consistent.
The real discussion is whether round 5 was as dominate enough to be a 10-8.. saying its objective and cant compare to other fights is just fucking stupid and irrelevent to the topic... like i said its a cop out. You arent making any points. Youre just stating a fact about how judges operate to pretend there is no debate to be had.
Yes you did.. now you're silent bye"umm youre an idiot!"
TLDR
Yes you did.. now you're silent bye
A lot of sherbros are gay for Yoel's hot bod and it tints their vision of the fight. I have no problem with their lust for Romero, but that shouldn't affect judging.I wouldnt be surprised if the majority of people who were crying robbery on sherdog watched that fight high on drugs (weed) or were severely drunk