# How the pros scored Condit/Diaz



## edlavis88 (Jul 12, 2009)

http://mobile.mmafighting.com/2012/2/5/2772168/ufc-143-twitter-nick-diaz-vs-carlos-condit-pros-score

Great article here, I dunno how to embed Twitter posts so if a mod knows then go for it.

I had the fight 48-47 Condit, tbh I'm shocked how many pros saw it clearly for Diaz when he got outstruck in 4 out of 5 rounds.


----------



## AlphaDawg (Nov 16, 2009)

I had it 48-47 Condit as well. 

Their opinions mean a lot more than mine on the matter so maybe I should rethink how I judge fights. Aggression and octagon control might be more important than I orignally thought.


----------



## edlavis88 (Jul 12, 2009)

Man i already hate Cody Mckenzie from watching Dana's V blogs and seeing how much of an asshole he is but if you don't hate him yet, go read his twitter. Loads of guys tweet him back saying they though Condit won, and he lays into them all with stuff like "you are a nobody, learn what footwork is and you'll see why Diaz won!" newsflash cody - Footwork is what won Condit the fight you assclown.


----------



## pipe (Jun 15, 2008)

Cody Mckenzie, lol. Hes a one trick pony who will be irelevant and out of a job after his next fight. I didnt like it but Condit did win the fight.


----------



## "El Guapo" (Jun 25, 2010)

I really don't understand how people are giving Condit round 5..... Full back mount was by far the biggest event of the round + the whole fight.....


----------



## AmdM (Apr 13, 2010)

Munoz scored it like me.
He's a great guy. :hug:


----------



## T.Bone (Oct 15, 2008)

"El Guapo" said:


> I really don't understand how people are giving Condit round 5..... Full back mount was by far the biggest event of the round + the whole fight.....


Because it was only for 1 min 30 secs... Condit was tagging him for 3 and a half mins before that.


----------



## SideWays222 (Sep 9, 2008)

AlphaDawg said:


> I had it 48-47 Condit as well.
> 
> Their opinions mean a lot more than mine on the matter so maybe I should rethink how I judge fights. Aggression and octagon control might be more important than I orignally thought.


Octagon Control went to Condit. If you are implying that Diaz took Octagon Control then you should start by learning what it is first. If you are not implying this then i apologize for wasting your time. I apologize about my apology for wasting your time to read that. I also apologize about my apology apology...... you get the point. :hug:


----------



## AmdM (Apr 13, 2010)

SideWays222 said:


> Octagon Control went to Condit. If you are implying that Diaz took Octagon Control then you should start by learning what it is first. If you are not implying this then i apologize for wasting your time. I apologize about my apology for wasting your time to read that. I also apologize about my apology apology...... you get the point. :hug:


Your all argument of a guy making the other run after him thus controlling where the fight takes place equaling octogon control is totally BS. 
Condit was backpedaling/running from corners because he was afraid of Diaz, therefore Diaz dictate that Condit ran for his life.


----------



## SideWays222 (Sep 9, 2008)

SideWays222 said:


> Octagon Control went to Condit. If you are implying that Diaz took Octagon Control then you should start by learning what it is first. If you are not implying this then i apologize for wasting your time. I apologize about my apology for wasting your time to read that. I also apologize about my apology apology...... you get the point. :hug:


"Added"

Only an idiot would say Condit ran for his life. Lets hope we dont have such an idiot in this forum.


----------



## T.Bone (Oct 15, 2008)

AmdM said:


> Your all argument of a guy making the other run after him thus controlling where the fight takes place equaling octogon control is totally BS.
> Condit was backpedaling/running from corners because he was afraid of Diaz, therefore Diaz dictate that Condit ran for his life.


Again what you call "running" is simply foot-work 101. 

Using lateral movement to out manouvre and effectively counter your opponent is basic and fundemental in any discipline.


----------



## "El Guapo" (Jun 25, 2010)

T.Bone said:


> Because it was only for 1 min 30 secs... Condit was tagging him for 3 and a half mins before that.


The stand up was pretty even with carlos getting slightly better hits off ( Note- even without his TD, back mount he was still getting hits in). Still, Nick was always the aggressor.

ANYWAY Carlos did absolutely nothing that round that compares to nick getting a TD and obtaining full mount.

I suggest you rewatch it because I am completely baffled.


----------



## edlavis88 (Jul 12, 2009)

I actually scored round 1,3,4 in favour of Condit with 2 and 5 going to Diaz. You can not and never will be able to get a definitive answer on whether 3 mins out outstriking outweighs getting back mount.

I dont think it's worth arguing about the decision as it was such a close fight and everyone values different aspects of fighting differently based on what background they come from or what dicipline they most value. I come from a boxing background therefore in terms of stand up i value landing strikes over everything else, others value control and aggression more.


----------



## T.Bone (Oct 15, 2008)

"El Guapo" said:


> The stand up was pretty even *with carlos getting slightly better hits off* ( Note- even without his TD, back mount he was still getting hits in). Still, Nick was always the aggressor.
> 
> ANYWAY Carlos did absolutely nothing that round that compares to nick getting a TD and obtaining full mount.
> 
> I suggest you rewatch it because I am completely baffled.


I've wathced it 3 times now. I'm baffled as to how you can say the standup was even after admitting Carlos got the better hits off, which in my eyes was for the majority of the round. Yes Nick got the TD but he wasn't able to do much after that and Carlos even ended up on top at the end of it. 

And Nick may have been pressing forward but he was eating shots whilst doing so.

Edit: Also what edlavis88 said above me is very true. That's a purely subjective argument and I understand people see things completely differently.


----------



## cursedbat (Apr 11, 2011)

Oh lord please give me strength.

Well the pros scored Diaz because, well Diaz won its not that hard. I mean how many of you besides not being fighters, have went back and watched the fight 3-4 times, and did a punch count? 

The only reason Condit came out ahead on strikes was those garbage leg taps he was doing as he jumped in and out. He did land more power shots in the 3-4 but not in the 1-2. And in the 5th Condit was not ahead on strikes go watch it again and count and then Diaz scored the only take down of the fight and controlled him on the ground for 1:30 minutes. He went for a heel lock at the last second Carlos wasnt on top as far as being in control ever. Sorry sometimes that might win you the round.

Put aside the fact that Carlos was no killer, or finisher, he came in to do a stand up tactical version of the lay and pray concocted by his weak camp who are known for $hit like that. Dont act like it was genius and I wont act like despite the fact that Diaz really won, he should have finished that runner or now make it his new life goal to get back in there and break him instead of retiring which is bad for the sport and the fans.

Be real it just kills me when people call one guy a baby for being fed-up with the system and call the other guy Mr wizard for using a cowards point strategy while claiming hes a warrior. How about a banker because thats what Carlos went for at the cost of his reputation and character.


----------



## T.Bone (Oct 15, 2008)

cursedbat said:


> Oh lord please give me strength.
> 
> Well the pros scored Diaz because, well Diaz won its not that hard. I mean how many of you besides not being fighters, have went back and watched the fight 3-4 times, and did a punch count?
> 
> ...


You know what... I'm convinced! You're doing a great job :thumb02:


----------



## SideWays222 (Sep 9, 2008)

SideWays222 said:


> Octagon Control went to Condit. If you are implying that Diaz took Octagon Control then you should start by learning what it is first. If you are not implying this then i apologize for wasting your time. I apologize about my apology for wasting your time to read that. I also apologize about my apology apology...... you get the point. :hug:





cursedbat said:


> *Oh lord please give me strength.
> 
> Well the pros scored Diaz because, well Diaz won* its not that hard. I mean how many of you besides not being fighters, have went back and watched the fight 3-4 times, and did a punch count?
> 
> ...


Lmao.. First two sentences and you say the 2 dumbest things. And i thought fighters thanking god after the fight was dumb.... this certainly tops that.

and i think you might be permanently on acid since you are seeing things and have a warped view on reality.
*
Diaz being played like a fiddle while walking at Condit.*
-




































*Diaz telling Condit "Dude what the hell are you doing. I had no idea we are allowed to use strategy when fighting. All my other opponents just stood there while i punched them in the jaw repeatedly. Cmon man... help a brotha out... be still."*










*Diazs "surprised" face when finding out kicks are allowed in MMA.*


















*
Condit not taking any risks by throwing a flying knee. And again it is something that Diaz is baffled by.*










*Condit outclassing Diaz by beating him to the punch in every exchange.*





























*The obvious and justified end result.*






























(Condit)-> :winner01:

(Diaz)-> :angry08:

(Diaz Fans)-> :sad03: :sad03: :sad03: :sad03: :sad03:

(Me and many others)-> :drink01: :drink01: :drink01: :drink01: :drink01: :happy02: :happy02: :happy02: :happy02: :happy02: :happy02: :happy02: :happy02: :happy02: :happy02: :happy02: :happy02: :happy02: :happy02: :happy02: :happy02::happy02::happy02: :happy02: :happy02: :happy02:


----------



## Budhisten (Apr 11, 2010)

Footwork. When Muhammad Ali does it he's the best ever. When anyone else does it, they're running scared.


----------



## kney (Jan 16, 2012)

Budhisten said:


> Footwork. When Muhammad Ali does it he's the best ever. When anyone else does it, they're running scared.


True!
Rep+


----------



## deadmanshand (Apr 9, 2008)

Budhisten said:


> Footwork. When Muhammad Ali does it he's the best ever. When anyone else does it, they're running scared.


Can we call this the Diaz Defense from now on?

This fight showed what I've been telling people about Diaz for a while. Every time someone has called Diaz the best boxer in mma I've had to correct them. He has a good chin and good hands but his power, head movement, and footwork are crap. If you don't allow him to back you up against the cage he can't really work his game on you. 

Condit and Greg Jackson saw this, planned for it, and made Diaz look like a frustrated bitch. And Diaz knew it. He was broken mentally after the third round. Watch how he dealt with his corner between rounds and his body language. That's a broken man.


----------



## Spec0688 (Sep 9, 2007)

Pros pick Diaz = 12
Pros pick Condit = 4

And obviously whoever has an opinion on Condit losing the fight is called a diaz fanboy, right...in case you couldn't tell... that was sarcasm. 

Condit fanboys are relentless at calling anyone with an opinion that doesn't involve saying how great of a gameplan it was a diaz fanboy. 

I'm neither a huge fan of Diaz or Condit, but a huge fan of GSP. Just pointing out the facts how I see them.


----------



## "El Guapo" (Jun 25, 2010)

T.Bone said:


> I've wathced it 3 times now. I'm baffled as to how you can say the standup was even after admitting Carlos got the better hits off, which in my eyes was for the majority of the round. Yes Nick got the TD but he wasn't able to do much after that and Carlos even ended up on top at the end of it.
> 
> And Nick may have been pressing forward but he was eating shots whilst doing so.
> 
> Edit: Also what edlavis88 said above me is very true. That's a purely subjective argument and I understand people see things completely differently.


Yes I agree Condit got the better of the stand up in round 5, however your previous post states 'condit was tagging him for 3.30' which sounds like it was a completly one-sided. In actual fact Diaz was pressing the whole time and tagging condit with good shots himself.

My main point was that none of this 'tagging' was anywhere near as significant as Nick getting the only TD of the fight and achieving back mount - one of the most dominant positions possible in MMA. He then proceeded he agressively work for a sub until the round was nearly over and he had to gamble.

I personally scored this fight 48-48 DRAW. But how people can give Condit round 5 I really dont understand.


----------



## SmackyBear (Feb 14, 2008)

AmdM said:


> Your all argument of a guy making the other run after him thus controlling where the fight takes place equaling octogon control is totally BS.
> Condit was backpedaling/running from corners because he was afraid of Diaz, therefore Diaz dictate that Condit ran for his life.


I stayed out of the stickied Diaz-Condit discussion since it was already so massive and I didn't want to read it all.

But I would hope someone would have pointed out by now that moving forward and scoring is aggression, the fourth and least important scoring criteria for the NSAC, not octagon control.

Nick didn't control the pace, place and position of the fight because he was almost always following Condit instead of cutting him off.




> L. Criteria Evaluation
> 1. Each judge is to evaluate which fighter was most effective. Thus striking and grappling skills are top priority.
> 2. Evaluating the criteria requires the use of a sliding scale. Fights can remain standing or grounded. Judges shall recognize that it isn't how long the fighters are standing or grounded, as to the scoring the fighters achieve ,while in those positions.
> 3. If 90% of the round is grounded one fighter on top, then:
> ...


For octagon control, "Which fighter created the situations that led to effective strikes?" Diaz tried to do that by cornering Condit, which he rarely succeeded at, then raising his arms and saying, "Stokton mutherfucker!" when he failed. Carlos actually created them by circling away and picking Diaz apart.


----------



## prolyfic (Apr 22, 2007)

Im not even sure the 1st 2 rounds werent closer than people are making it out to be. Fight metrix already said that these were the most leg kicks landed in the history of the UFC. Granted they might not do significant damage everytime they land but they do score points. Lets face it Condit said it best, if he fought Diaz's fight then Diaz would be champion. We forget its called mixed martial arts. Diaz didn't really do anything other than attempt to clinch and stalk Condit while talking more than triple the shots he dished out.

That being said I thought that the first minute or so in the 5th round that Diaz did land several leg kicks on Condit that I thought surprised Condit and then Carlos had control until he got taken down. SO I thought it could have gone either way. 

As far as Octagon control, I understand that Diaz walked him down, but Condit circled out (or "Ran" occording to some ridiculous people)and took the center of the Octagon. I really don't get how people just expected Condit to stand and bang with someone that can take a hell of a shot and come forward. Diaz boxing is superior to Condits, so why would he box with Diaz. 

Funny how Shogun (won) the first fight with Machida because most couldnt understand how the leg attacks didnt count. Now its called running. Diaz wanted Condit to trade and couldnt do anything to counter what Condit was doing in there. If condit ran and didnt land anything of note then why was Diaz looking more worse for ware?


----------



## T.Bone (Oct 15, 2008)

"El Guapo" said:


> Yes I agree Condit got the better of the stand up in round 5, however your previous post states 'condit was tagging him for 3.30' which sounds like it was a completly one-sided. In actual fact Diaz was pressing the whole time and tagging condit with good shots himself.
> 
> My main point was that none of this 'tagging' was anywhere near as significant as Nick getting the only TD of the fight and achieving back mount - one of the most dominant positions possible in MMA. He then proceeded he agressively work for a sub until the round was nearly over and he had to gamble.
> 
> I personally scored this fight 48-48 DRAW. But how people can give Condit round 5 I really dont understand.


It's not that he controlled the round prior to the TD (which he did anyway) it's how effective he was for that time.

Basically I think he was able to utilize his strengths standing for most of the last round whilst Diaz wasn't fully able to utilize his. I mean he took his back but then Carlos defended 2 sub attempts. Just my opinion man.

Edit: FTR I don't think it was one sided at all. If Diaz had landed more before the TD he would've taken the round for sure.


----------



## oldfan (Mar 14, 2010)

Hmmmm... Dan henderson
Pat Militich
Matt Lindland
Jens Pulver

Four of the fighters that I respect the most All think Diaz won.

I will watch again without sound and reconsider.


----------



## kney (Jan 16, 2012)

First time I watched:
Round 1: 10-10
Round 2: 10-9 Diaz
Round 3: 9-10 Condit
Round 4: 9-10 Condit
Round 5: 10-10

Gonna watch it again this evening.. Maybe I'll feel different. I don't think I'm going to change my mind.


----------



## Abrissbirne (Jul 4, 2010)

I agree with Sideways 100%. He couldnt be more right with his post. Going forward while getting hit constantly is not a smart way to fight.


----------



## Zemelya (Sep 23, 2007)

looked like Condit landed more but also looked like his punches/kicks did less damage. pretty much never Diaz looked to be in trouble. 
Nick's attacks seemed to me to be more powerful + Carlos's running sort of showed that it was the case.

IMO running with your back towards opponent should be point deductible - especially to this extent. Angling and footwork is one thing but full on running is something else


----------



## Toxic (Mar 1, 2007)

They only picked those fighters in the OP for the way they wanted it to look. 


Where is Bas Rutten one of the most respected analysts and fighters in the sport? iaz.


----------



## TheNinja (Dec 10, 2008)

I'm with the Pro's..I clearly had Diaz winning...Everything Condit threw was backing up, thus not having as much impact on the punches or kicks...The Judges gave no credit to Diaz for controlling the fight...Which is Odd by the way they always score fights...

Either way, I was just dissapointed in the fight as a whole..I thought both fighters should have done better


----------



## MMAnWEED (Aug 8, 2010)

It's a classic dispute between "what should count more than what". I personally think significant strikes landed should count more than being the aggressor. Ultimately though, it comes down to the judges and there is nothing you can do about it. Maybe one day, they'll create a better scoring system so there is less controversy.


----------



## chosenFEW (Oct 25, 2009)

helwani also scored the fight for diaz.


----------



## SideWays222 (Sep 9, 2008)

Thanks for all the reps peepz. I worked hard on that post


----------



## ThenYouWokeUp (Jul 2, 2011)

Even Joe Rogan agreed that Diaz won 1,2 and 5 after rewatching tha fight. I have to agree myself.


----------



## limba (Jul 21, 2009)

SideWays222 said:


> Lmao.. First two sentences and you say the 2 dumbest things. And i thought fighters thanking god after the fight was dumb.... this certainly tops that.
> 
> and i think you might be permanently on acid since you are seeing things and have a warped view on reality.
> *
> ...


LMAO dude!!!

That was brilliant. :thumbsup:

PS: those many "posts-wars" we had in the past really showed their "value" in this post. :happy01:

I almost feel.....jealous of your post.


----------



## Nefilim777 (Jun 24, 2009)

I scored it 48-47 Condit. It wasn't all that pretty, but it was effective.


----------



## rebonecrusher (Nov 21, 2011)

I've only watched the fight once and I was out at a bar when I watched it so I didn't get to analyze the bout as much as I normally do when watching but I scored it for Diaz. I thought he won the first two rounds and that Condit won the third and forth and Diaz took the final round.


----------



## madrappa (Dec 8, 2009)

A good point thats been brought up, in boxing if you turn your back on your opponent, you get a point deducted.

i know a lot of yall are praising condit for not falling into nicks gameplan, but i dont see how you cant put condit at any fault for not engaging. his strikes were obviously the less effective ones

if i want to make gifs of each round where diaz was landing beautiful subtle straight rights and straight lefts, i could just like you guys making these condit images. but it seemed like everything condit threw was with restraint... nothing hurt diaz at all

i only see condit taking rd 3 and 4


----------



## Toxic (Mar 1, 2007)

madrappa said:


> A good point thats been brought up, in boxing if you turn your back on your opponent, you get a point deducted.
> 
> i know a lot of yall are praising condit for not falling into nicks gameplan, but i dont see how you cant put condit at any fault for not engaging. his strikes were obviously the less effective ones
> 
> ...


In boxing turning you back makes it so your opponent really can't attack, in MMA turning your back is taking a chance of giving up a bad position. If Diaz wanted Condit to quit turning his back to him he should have made him pay for it. Diaz is a great grappler why didn't he get in close and when Condit turned oto leave Diaz could have taken his back. Thing is Condit game with a great gameplan and adapted Diaz showed a complete lack of ability to adapt and that is why he is crying his eyes out in Stockton without a belt.


----------



## ESPADA9 (Oct 13, 2006)

I’ve always thought of the term “octagon control” as the ability to control where the fight takes place i.e. pressing someone up against the cage using the clinch and dirty-boxing, taking a guy down repetidly, cutting off someone and landing effective strikes, cornering someone against the cage and landing effective strikes (Cerrone vs. Diaz or Penn vs. DIaz) etc. Carlos was able to escape most of the time, that’s not really control. Nick was the aggressor but not in control.


----------



## Woodenhead (Jan 5, 2010)

Spec0688 said:


> Pros pick Diaz = 12
> Pros pick Condit = 4


And here I thought there were more than 16 pro fighters out there. Silly me.

I found 10 who thought it was Condit with a quick Twitter search the other night, but I guess they aren't really pro. (people like fitch, bendo, and stann) Not like their opinion matters anyway; most of them are meatheads.


----------



## RedRocket44 (Sep 18, 2011)

AlphaDawg said:


> I had it 48-47 Condit as well.
> 
> Their opinions mean a lot more than mine on the matter so maybe I should rethink how I judge fights. Aggression and octagon control might be more important than I orignally thought.


Their opinion doesn't matter more. It's the 3 judges who matter - and nobody else. 

Don't second guess yourself because of other people who are no more of a judge than you are have a different opinion.


----------



## Fine Wine (Aug 30, 2010)

Budhisten said:


> Footwork. When Muhammad Ali does it he's the best ever. When anyone else does it, they're running scared.


I never saw Muhammad Ali quite literally RUN. There is footwork and then there is running. Condit did a bit of both.

I gave it 48-47 Diaz, but he can't complain, he had it in the bag after 2 dominant first rounds and then just stepped off the gas and did nothing again until the 5th round.


----------



## Nikkolai (Jan 7, 2008)

I am not sure why everyone likes to bring up Shogun vs Machida 1. Shogun's kicks were thrown to damage (which its effects were seen on rounds 4 and 5 as well as when corner would massage Machida's legs), not for points.


----------



## madrappa (Dec 8, 2009)

i understand what everyone is saying about condit countering well. He did that to win rd 3 and 4.

but round 1 and 2 i saw diaz landing the snapping punches and being the aggressor. then again in the 5th i saw him land more snapping blow and then get the TD and a sub attempt.


----------



## Mckeever (Apr 26, 2009)

Budhisten said:


> Footwork. When Muhammad Ali does it he's the best ever. When anyone else does it, they're running scared.


Never ever compare Muhamed Ali to this ever again.


----------



## Walker (May 27, 2007)

Mckeever said:


> Never ever compare Muhamed Ali to this ever again.


You really mean Ali never slipped a punch and made someone look foolish swinging at a target that wasn't there???

Comical.


----------



## Mckeever (Apr 26, 2009)

Walker said:


> You really mean Ali never slipped a punch and made someone look foolish swinging at a target that wasn't there???
> 
> Comical.


No. I mean that Muhamed Ali has never physically jogged from one side of the ring to the other in an effort to evade his opponent.

Do we have another member who has some thing wrong with his eye sight? Do your eyes not see Condit literally JOGGING in the other direction.

NEWS FLASH - Jogging isn't great footwork, it's just jogging.


----------



## RedRocket44 (Sep 18, 2011)

ESPADA9 said:


> I’ve always thought of the term “octagon control” as the ability to control where the fight takes place i.e. pressing someone up against the cage using the clinch and dirty-boxing, taking a guy down repetidly, cutting off someone and landing effective strikes, cornering someone against the cage and landing effective strikes (Cerrone vs. Diaz or Penn vs. DIaz) etc. Carlos was able to escape most of the time, that’s not really control. Nick was the aggressor but not in control.


Exactly this.

My interpretation of "octagon control" would be that you dictate where the fight takes place. Condit seemed to dictate where the fight took place (center cage), where Diaz repeately tried to corner Condit (without much success). At best, I would call the entire category a wash.


----------



## Walker (May 27, 2007)

Mckeever said:


> No. I mean that Muhamed Ali has never physically jogged from one side of the ring to the other in an effort to evade his opponent.
> 
> Do we have another member who has some thing wrong with his eye sight? Do your eyes not see Condit literally JOGGING in the other direction.
> 
> NEWS FLASH - Jogging isn't great footwork, it's just jogging.


Try watching this and see how deluded you are.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uzWynvBLJ4I

Ali constantly moving away and countering Liston when the timing was right. You don't know what you are talking about.


----------



## Mckeever (Apr 26, 2009)

Walker said:


> Try watching this and see how deluded you are.


Try actually embedding the video correctly before insulting me, thanks.

I also don't respect a forum administrator insulting other members. I'm sure if I were to label you deluded I would be heavily warned or even banned, which is abusing your power.

Post reported.

Edit: Just finished watching the video and I don't recall Ali ever jogging from one side of the ring to the other. What I watched in that video was Ali pivoting, angling and circling away from his opponent. Whilst at the same time also using fantastic head movement and countering with sharp punches.

Are you genuinely having difficulty differentiating between good footwork and literally JOGGING away? Again, jogging or running is not any form of effective footwork and Ali certainly didn't display any of that in your video.


----------



## Walker (May 27, 2007)

I'm calling your opinion deluded- that's not an insult to you personally- big difference.

Don't worry I'll ban myself for trying to engage in a discussion with you. :thumbsup:


----------



## Mckeever (Apr 26, 2009)

Walker said:


> I'm calling your opinion deluded- that's not an insult to you personally- big difference.
> 
> Don't worry I'll ban myself for trying to engage in a discussion with you. :thumbsup:


What ever mate, we both know what you really meant. Care to respond to my post without throwing around insults?

I edited it about the video.


----------



## Walker (May 27, 2007)

Mckeever said:


> What ever mate, we both know what you really meant. Care to respond to my post without throwing around insults?
> 
> I edited it about the video.


Nope- I wouldn't want to upset you further- life's too short for dealing with hyper-sensitive online posters. :thumbsup:


----------



## Mckeever (Apr 26, 2009)

Walker said:


> Nope- I wouldn't want to upset you further- life's too short for dealing with hyper-sensitive online posters. :thumbsup:


Oh, you're taking that route. I responded to your post and countered your points in a civilised manner.

You, a forum administrator, resorted to throwing around petty insults and acting immaturely. 

I'm quite happy to engage in a discussion with you without the petty insults. I don't want to argue with a fellow ass man.










You can't argue with that!


----------



## SideWays222 (Sep 9, 2008)

Walker said:


> Try watching this and see how *deluded *you are.
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uzWynvBLJ4I
> 
> Ali constantly moving away and countering Liston when the timing was right. You don't know what you are talking about.


Whoa!! wait a minute there. Did you just serious call a poster "deluded"??? 

The outrage!! OUTRAGE I SAY.!


----------



## Mckeever (Apr 26, 2009)

SideWays222 said:


> Whoa!! wait a minute there. Did you just serious call a poster "deluded"???
> 
> The outrage!! OUTRAGE I SAY.!


You're missing the point. If a regular member were to call an administrator deluded, it would very likely result in an infraction, warning or ban. This isn't about the severity of the insult, it's about an administrator abusing their power.


----------



## SideWays222 (Sep 9, 2008)

Mckeever said:


> You're missing the point. If a regular member were to call an administrator deluded, it would very likely result in an infraction, warning or ban. This isn't about the severity of the insult, it's about an administrator abusing their power.


Iv called mods worse then deluded on a pretty consistent basis. They have never warned me about it and i get my share of warnings. Only once can i recall a mod being a pansy and warning me for something that isnt really an insult but just him being overly sensitive. I have serious doubts he would warn you if you call him deluded or any other mod for that matter.

If anything i think Mods get overly sensitive when other members are being half assed insulted. But its their jobs to help the members so i can certainly understand it.


----------



## dlxrevolution (Jul 16, 2009)

Honestly, who gives a damn how the "pros" scored it. Condit won. End of story.


----------



## Toxic (Mar 1, 2007)

Relax Mkeever, seriously you think deluded is the worst an admin has been called by a current member?


----------



## Mckeever (Apr 26, 2009)

Toxic said:


> Relax Mkeever, seriously you think deluded is the worst an admin has been called by a current member?


I, am relaxed. Maybe I'm too used to other forums where admins and mods really abuse their power.

Either way, he was still being provocative for no real reason.


----------



## badboy (Aug 1, 2009)

Hahaha well said McKeever. I give that round to you, you came with a civilised argument and Walker couldn't counter it so ducked and ran. Although, we judge on who can back out quicker so does Walker have you beaten?? LMAO


----------



## SideWays222 (Sep 9, 2008)

Toxic said:


> Relax Mkeever, seriously you think deluded is the worst an admin has been called by a current member?


If you guys handed out infractions for being called deluded i probably would have MAYBE made it out of my first month of creating my account :thumb02:


----------



## jonnyg4508 (Jan 30, 2010)

Mckeever said:


> Never ever compare Muhamed Ali to this ever again.


Thank You. 

Some people have no clue. They hear Greg Jackson compare his kicks with Ali's jab and they take it and run.

Ali moved to set up shots. Like Anderson Silva. He may have spun out from the ropes too, but he came right back with combo's.

He didn't turn his back and go the other way. 

Condit compared to Ali....I have seen it all now.


----------



## drey2k (Jul 9, 2009)

I think Diaz won 1,2 and 5 and Condit won 3 and 4.

You have to be a real moron to give Condit round 5.


----------



## jonnyg4508 (Jan 30, 2010)

dlxrevolution said:


> Honestly, who gives a damn how the "pros" scored it. Condit won. End of story.


WHo cares? Diaz backers do.

If you are going to call us delusional and don't know the sport....then I guess you have to believe a bunch of respectable pros don't know the sport either.

For thinking Diaz won the fight I have been told that I must be new too MMA. Well I guess Chuck Liddell, Hendo, Anderson, Neer, Miletich, and everyone else that thought Diaz won must be "new" too MMA as well.

Point is, all you backers of Condit's run away style think anyone who disagrees is retarded. Yet several...several pros thought the same things.

I'd rather be on the side of them than Cecil Peoples. I know that for sure. If it means I'm "wrong" then so be it. Never felt so good to be wrong.


----------



## jonnyg4508 (Jan 30, 2010)

Also throw Joe Rogan to this list.

He said live, without the best view, he felt like Condit was going to win it.

He said he went home and watched it and scored the 1st, 2nd, and 5th for Diaz.


----------



## AmdM (Apr 13, 2010)

You know Diaz won when Cecil peoples thinks Condit won.


----------



## MLD (Oct 15, 2006)

cursedbat said:


> Oh lord please give me strength.
> 
> Well the pros scored Diaz because, well Diaz won its not that hard. I mean how many of you besides not being fighters, have went back and watched the fight 3-4 times, and did a punch count?
> 
> ...


Whenever I hear the term "butt hurt" it is this kind of post that comes to mind.


----------



## AmdM (Apr 13, 2010)

Joe Rogan talks about nick diaz beating carlos condit


----------

