The biased commentary at 299

djason1988

Black Belt
@Black
Joined
Jul 29, 2010
Messages
5,311
Reaction score
1,688
I've heard some bias before, but generally not to the point that it bugged me, but two fights in particular Saturday were rough, rda/gamrot and burns/jdm.

To be clear, the young guns did win and should have, but the fights were way closer than they were initially expected to be, and immediately visibly so.

Rda dropped gamrot twice and was cleanly outworking him in the grappling in the first round, yet all they talked about was how strong and durable gamrot was.

Burns won damn near every second of his fight up until that knee, yet they constantly talked about how great a boxer jdm is, even as burns was smashing him with power shots.

Was watching the fights with a whole group of people who all felt the same way, very much felt like commentary was given a specific fighter they were supposed to shine up.
 
I've heard some bias before, but generally not to the point that it bugged me
I hear it every event, but I've never heard enough to bug me.

Color commentators talk up the fight. I hear it, and then it goes off my back like water in the rain. Sometimes it's interesting, often it's not, and I don't take ANY of it very seriously. Certainly not seriously enough to be frustrated by it.

But based on threads like this, just about every event it's enough to bug someone.
 
The JDM boxing was silly at times when Burns landed a legit shot and then JDM "landed" a 5 punch combo where the punches just barely touched his face and shouldn't even be counted as significant strikes. (This fight made me wonder how inaccurately significant strikes may be counted in some fights)

He did absolutely destroy Burns in the end tho so it didn't matter.
 
Whenever they start that shit up, it automatically has me start rooting for the other guy, just so they can look extra hetarded when their one-sided slant backfires.

It gets so ridiculous at times that it's embarrassing. Like nothing their non chosen fighter does lands or is effective, and everything their golden child does is incredible.
 
rogan's time is up. DC biases are just out of control. this weekend was particularly bad. i don't even listen to them anymore. my WIFE, who watches with me sometimes, but is by no means a true fan, kept saying "what the hell are they talking about?"
 
you know what i hate more than that, "significant strikes"..i dont even know what that means, you either fucking hit someone or you dont

mma scoring, commentary and fans are a bit retarded at times
 
rogan's time is up. DC biases are just out of control. this weekend was particularly bad. i don't even listen to them anymore. my WIFE, who watches with me sometimes, but is by no means a true fan, kept saying "what the hell are they talking about?"

I love that you put your wife on blast for not being a true fan.

Gotta keep them in check, fucking casuals.
 
The worst I've ever heard was Lee Murray vs Anderson Silva. The second worst was Dan Hardy during this weekend's PFL card.
 
Lol, the bias over JDM was ridiculous.
I remember watching it and thinking "lol, they're trying to convince us that what's is happening is the complete opposite to what we are watching?? "
Burns won 1st and 2nd clearly.
But JDM did a good job and get the finish at the end, no hate towards him, but DC and Bisping bias just sucks.
 
I've heard some bias before, but generally not to the point that it bugged me, but two fights in particular Saturday were rough, rda/gamrot and burns/jdm.

To be clear, the young guns did win and should have, but the fights were way closer than they were initially expected to be, and immediately visibly so.

Rda dropped gamrot twice and was cleanly outworking him in the grappling in the first round, yet all they talked about was how strong and durable gamrot was.

Burns won damn near every second of his fight up until that knee, yet they constantly talked about how great a boxer jdm is, even as burns was smashing him with power shots.

Was watching the fights with a whole group of people who all felt the same way, very much felt like commentary was given a specific fighter they were supposed to shine up.
I didn't find it particularly biased in either of those fights. I have noticed a lot of bias in the past. Also commentators are sometimes assigned talking points about fighter X and the other fighter Y. I find the bias bad when a guy like DC prattles on about the Wrestling based fighter getting a TD (with ZERO control) and gargling his nuts while that same wrestler is getting outstruck. Sometimes Rogan praises a guy that the UFC is pushing despite the opponent being dominant. He used to just call it as he saw it but now on occasion he is fed what to say IMO.
 
rogan's time is up. DC biases are just out of control.

DC's bias the other week in the Umar fight was so bad.

Umar gets clipped and nearly put out, and DC's just creaming his pants about the "finish" of Umar's panic takedown.

The biggest take away from that moment was not the fucking panic takedown, it was the knockdown, but DC didn't even want that mentioned because Umar is his friend.
 
Back
Top