How did you score Gamrot vs Tsarukyan?

Who did you think won?


  • Total voters
    516
  • Poll closed .
I had it:

48-47 Gamrot

R1: Tsarukyan
R2: Gamrot
R3: Gamrot
R4: Tsarukyan
R5: Gamrot

I thought the swing round was R2. Tsarukyan was landing lots of kicks but Gamrot was landing more visible blows with his hands which is what prompted me to award him the second round.

I think the commentary were making too big a deal about the body kicks. Sure they are loud on impact but if they have no visible effect on Gamrot they aren't any more significant than any other type of kick.

I can understand why folks listening to the commentators thought Tsarukyan was way ahead but the judges got it right in my view. The fact it was a unanimous decision and every judge had the same score is a good indication they got it right.
 
Last edited:
I thought Arman 4-1

I guess the judges didn't get the memo that damage>control.
 
And there is the classic robbery claim after a razor thin decision. Sherdog tradition.

I agree with you on damage vs takedown but not even close to a robbery

In no way shape or form did that fight meet any of the criteria for a robbery. Numpty.
There is no denying that all the rounds were very close and very competitive. But if Arman lands the most impactful strikes of the round it should go to him. If fighter A lands jab and fighter B lands a harder jab nothing else happens in a round it is close, but easy to score
 
Gamrot came out the better wrestler but he did not do much with it. I think all those hard body shots made the difference and I scored the fight 48-47 Arman.
His team should call for an immediate rematch but I doubt that Gamrot will accept it. He knows he squeaked by.
 
Arman needs better boxing. If he would've landed a few solid punches to go with those kicks he would've won. Gamrot kind of picked him apart in the last 3 rounds.
 
That was such a high level, high IQ fight. Some of the best grappling I've seen since Maia/Shields. Still, Arman cheated numerous times, and I thought Gamrot's punches late were more damaging than the kicks those last few rounds and Arman got taken down and controlled in segments of those last two rounds.
For real for real.
Fair enough obviously, i'm also admittedly biased towards Arman (though i'd root for Gamrot in most other fights).
They're so flawless though, just stunning.
 
Gamrot 3-2

Normally takedowns don't count for me, but this was Gamrot beating Tsarukyan at his own game. Winning the takedowns and the scrambles. And almost getting in a choke there.

Making Tsarukyan into a fence-grabber. Gamrot won the last 3 rounds and the whole fight, though it was very close
 
i dont think sherdoggers know the difference between a close fight that could go either way and a robbery.
A robbery is a fight where a fighter wins by virtue of winning a round or multiple rounds that there's no argument for them winning.

Based on the scoring criteria, which values effective striking as most important, with damage being the indicator of who was more effective is judged, there's no argument for Gamrot winning the 4th. A close fight that could go either way is Kattar/Emmett. The 2nd round was razor thin.
 
What does this mean? It means that you only begin evaluating grappling success such as takedowns, submission attempts, and control time if the striking was even

Plainly incorrect. The official criteria puts striking and grappling in the same tier of priority.

2017_Unified_Rules_-_MMA_Judging_Criteria__Final__-_Page_1.0.jpg
 
So how many degrees of Kevin Bacon is Dan Urban from being related to Cecil Peoples? Ridiculous.
 
The butthurt here is hilarious.

Crying about a close fight like that? Really?
 
So tired of the damage arguments people always make, crazy how many people think winning wrestling exchanges means nothing

Yeah if Arman was beating Gamrot handily on the feet he should’ve won, but it was super close, and the grappling put Gamrot over
 
Arman won rd 1 2 3* (debatable) and 4
 
Back
Top