# This Gilbert guy really hasn't impressed me



## StandThemUp (May 30, 2008)

I have been hearing up and down, left and right, back and forth that GM is the Best 155 on the planet.
Am I the only one that just doesn't see it?

If he is the best, where does that put Josh Thompson, who in my view totally won that fight.

I am starting to think the 10 Point must system doesn't belong in MMA. It just doesn't accurately reflect who really wins these fights. 
Anyone can argue that at the end of each round, this guy or that guy won the last 5 minutes of fighting, and then we start over. But taken as a whole, there is no way GM won that fight, no way in hell. It's time for MMA to score fights as a whole and not by round, for example, the rounds that JT won, where won in a far superior fashion to the ones GM won, that 4th round for Thompson was worth at least 2 of the Rounds that GM won, but the judges can't do that. It's so stupid to put some dumb archaic 10 point must process, taken from a totally different sport and try to force it to fit into an MMA frame. It doesn't fricken work and it needs to end.

I am sick and tired of seeing guys get wins for fights they lost. I'm sick and tired of a guy getting beat up all round and then "Stealing the round" with a lame takedown at the end that has no more impact than a casually landed Jab. I heard that all night "He is stealing the round" - **** that, they need to stop being rewarded for "Stealing Rounds" and they need to actually Win them.

If I was a lesser fan, this would turn me off to the sport, enough to just stop watching. But I am not. I am a rabid fan. But, there are many border line fans and if this sport really wants to grow and get out of the fringe, they need to fix this. 

Everyone likes to say "If you don't like the decision, don't leave it to the judges". That's bullshit. You should be able to leave it to the judges and trust that they will get it right. Does anyone actually tell these judges how to score the fights? Do the judges actually know how to fight? Do they know what's hard to do and what isn't? Do they know what causes reall damage (Like stikes and headkicks) vs what "Looks" impressive, like a Takedown or Slam?
Obviously, they don't.

It's not just Strikeforce, it's all of MMA.


----------



## box (Oct 15, 2006)

The problem with judging the whole fight is that emotion would come into play over what actually happened. A fighter could have one flurry in the last round and have the judges sway their vote. All the while throwing out the previous 2 or 4 rounds.

What I would like to see, takedowns recieve a fraction of the points unless you advance position, or land significant gnp. If that were the case, Thompson may have won the fight. The takedowns Gilbert landed had a significant play in that decision i'm sure, when they didn't lead to much.


----------



## joey.jupiter (Apr 7, 2010)

I thought Melendez won the fight. I suppose him being a Caesar Gracie guy helps with his reputation but I do believe he'd so well in the UFC, maybe not champion straight away.


----------



## cdtcpl (Mar 9, 2007)

The fight confirmed what I knew for a long time. GM might be a top 10 fighter in the UFC, but I can also name 10+ UFC LW's that I think would beat him, let alone the top 5 that I think would destroy him.

He's not bad, but he isn't the best. If he ever moves over to the UFC he will learn real quick the truth.


----------



## sickcat (Apr 22, 2007)

Melendez won that fight but I was not Impressed at all and have not been impressed by his last 3 or 4 fights. 

I wish BJ would come back and fight him and put all this hype to rest.

On another note, did anyone else think Thomson looked kind of small for 155? could he make 145?


----------



## edlavis88 (Jul 12, 2009)

I dont get the ridiculous hype either. He has looked ok in SF but far from sensational. I thought he lost the fight on saturday tbh. He scraped past Thomson and was boring as shite against Masvidal and Aoki. 

Dont get me wrong he is obviously a good fighter - a top 10 LW, but he has to do a lot more in my eyes to be put up on a level with Nate, Bendo and Edgar.

I will say in GMs defense though that i think Josh Thomson is one of the most underrated LWs out there. He is one of the guys who HAS to come over to the UFC from SF.


----------



## Big_Charm (Jan 7, 2011)

edlavis88 said:


> I dont get the ridiculous hype either. He has looked ok in SF but far from sensational. I thought he lost the fight on saturday tbh. He scraped past Thomson and was boring as shite against Masvidal and Aoki.
> 
> Dont get me wrong he is obviously a good fighter - a top 10 LW, but he has to do a lot more in my eyes to be put up on a level with Nate, Bendo and Edgar.
> 
> I will say in GMs defense though that i think Josh Thomson is one of the most underrated LWs out there. He is one of the guys who HAS to come over to the UFC from SF.


I'd have to agree with you.

GM is a talented fighter, but his last few fights put a lot of doubt in my mind, if he could hang with the elite guys from UFC.

Nate/Edgar/Bendo would all put beatings on him... I'd say he has his work cut out for him to even reach the top 5.

I'd give Thompson big credit too, he is underrated and that fight looked to have gone either way.


----------



## Toxic (Mar 1, 2007)

I agree with Thomson being underrated the guy is likely a top 10 LW but honesly I think him and Gil are on par with guys like Clay Guida and Donald Cerrone as guys that fall just short of contendership.


----------



## osmium (Mar 6, 2007)

I thought it was a draw leaning melendez. Either way you can't be the best 155er in the world and get your ass handed to you in the fourth and fifth by Thomson who is a shell of his former self. Gil can't hang with the elites at 155.


----------



## ProdigyPenn (Sep 9, 2011)

I actually gave this to Josh Thomson. 

But if anything, this fight rises question that is Melendez really ready for UFC Lightweight champion? After this performance, I think both Benson Henderson and Frankie Edgar would beat him if they meet.


----------



## Rauno (Nov 20, 2009)

Thompson won the fight, Melendez won the competition imo. (Although i scored it for Thompson as well).


----------



## StandThemUp (May 30, 2008)

One cool thing I heard on Sirius Fight Club today was that, if anything, JT may have lost the fight, but has won the war. In the sense that he made a really awesome showing for himself, showed he is one of the best at 155, and now, has no reason to stay in SF and may be able to turn this loss into a trip to the UFC.

In contrast, GM may have won the battle, but is stuck with the curse of holding the SF LW belt and has no chance of moving to the UFC anytime soon.

So in terms of long term success. Josh may have come out in top.

That being said, I heard a couple things that bothered me. Many, many MMA "commentators" and interviewers saying round 1 could have been scored 10-10. Please correct me if I am wrong, but isn't that supposed to be impossible in a true 10 Point Must system, where the winner get's 10 and the lose get's 9 or less (barring any deductions).

On that note - Why wasn't round 4 scored a 10-8 for JT? Can anyone honestly say that GM won either rounds 1,2 or 3 as definitively as JT won round 4?

And in there lies the problem.


----------



## ProdigyPenn (Sep 9, 2011)

StandThemUp said:


> One cool thing I heard on Sirius Fight Club today was that, if anything, JT may have lost the fight, but has won the war. In the sense that he made a really awesome showing for himself, showed he is one of the best at 155, and now, has no reason to stay in SF and may be able to turn this loss into a trip to the UFC.
> 
> In contrast, GM may have won the battle, but is stuck with the curse of holding the SF LW belt and has no chance of moving to the UFC anytime soon.
> 
> ...


Not sure if it is possible to give it a 10-10. But indeed, the first round is razor thin and could have gone either way. I gave this round and the 2nd to Melendez and 3,4,5 to Thomson. 

As for a 10-8 round, Judges will normally only give a 10-8 round if a fighter is truly dominate from the start to finish and is on the verge of finishing the other guy off. (i.e round 1 of Maynard/Edgar 2.) 

For this fight, round 4 is clearly a 10-9 for Thomson. He didn't really dominate the round. It was actually pretty even initially. He only manage to sink in the RNC near the end of the round and even that wasnt close enough to finishing the fight.

So either way you look at it, it was 10-9 for Thomson.


----------



## edlavis88 (Jul 12, 2009)

10-10 rounds are possible. Some athletic commissions actively encourage judges to use them and some actively discourage their use.


----------



## Hawndo (Aug 16, 2009)

I had it scored for Josh. I've been reserving judgement until he fights a solid UFC level fighter, but after last night nah, never been that impressed but last night confirmed his overratedness (did I just invent a word?). I'd say you can easily argue top 10 but certainly not 5 and a snow balls chance in hell of him being the best.


----------



## Hammerlock2.0 (Jun 17, 2009)

To be honest I never considered Melendez to be a top 5 guy. I always thought of him as Strikeforce's version of Clay Guida. Thomson beat him up good (and won the fight) and Thomson has never beaten a top 10 guy in his whole career. Neither has Gilbert (I'm not counting the Aoki fight because in fights stuff usually happens). I guess that makes them both top 20ish.


----------



## Rusty (Apr 13, 2010)

http://www.ufc.com/discover/sport/rules-and-regulations#14


----------



## StandThemUp (May 30, 2008)

RustyRenegade said:


> http://www.ufc.com/discover/sport/rules-and-regulations#14


Based on those rules, Round 4 was clearly a 10-8 round for JT. 

But I guess this whole system just sucks, because it's totally subjective and there is too much room for error.

For instance, it says it should be a 10-9 if one guy wins by a "Close" Margin and a 10-8 if one guy wins "Overwhelmingly".

Well, the problem is, there are a lot of ways to win that are inbetween Overwhelming and a Close Margin.

Clearly the first round was at most, a close margin, But there is no way in hell round 4 was an "equal" close margin, the margin was much bigger, but maybe not overwhelming in some peoples eyes (Though I think it clearly was).

I don't know. I just don't like it. There is no reason they can't come up with a more definitive way to judge these fights and not leave it so open to interpretation and judges bias.

That being said, it creates controversy, which can be the best thing for generating interest in a sport. ie: College Football. They could have a playoff system, but then what would everyone argue about all day long?


----------



## Term (Jul 28, 2009)

StandThemUp said:


> Based on those rules, Round 4 was clearly a 10-8 round for JT.
> 
> But I guess this whole system just sucks, because it's totally subjective and there is too much room for error.
> 
> ...


I agree. I think if you judge the fight overall Thompson won, but under the current system it was Melendez. Why call it a 10 point system when you leave no room to go below a 10-8. Just give 3 points to the round winner, 2 to the loser went it's close and 1 when it's not. Why waste all those other points.


----------



## Dtwizzy2k5 (Jul 7, 2008)

Melendez is a top 10 fighter, but he is not UFC champion calibur. The scoring system should be a 5 point must where the loser gets 4 points for an arguable loss, 3 for a clear loss, and 2 for a dominant loss. The final two points will be reserved for potential deductions so as to avoid instances of "negative points", and 5 is a nice round number for fans and judges to work with.


----------



## Roflcopter (Sep 5, 2008)

"This Gilbert guy" is where I stopped caring about your opinion.


----------

