# ***OFFICIAL*** Johny Hendricks vs. Robbie Lawler Thread



## Budhisten (Apr 11, 2010)

*Welterweight bout: 170 pounds*
*Main event - Five round fight for the UFC Welterweight Title*















​


----------



## Toxic (Mar 1, 2007)

This fight still seems to soon to me, problem is Robbie has done enough while Johny did nothing.


----------



## K R Y (Nov 19, 2007)

Hoping Robbie takes it. He definitely can. 50/50 for me.


----------



## RangerClydeTheBlue (Jul 11, 2012)

Robbie's boxing and left kicks have been looking better every single time he steps out there. I expect him to pace himself better this time and take the decision.


----------



## _RIVAL_ (Mar 7, 2008)

Robbie by being one of the baddest mofos on the planet over Hendricks who hasn't fought since and had surgery.


----------



## dsmjrv (Jan 27, 2010)

i expect him to actually get the finish this time around.. probably 3rd or 4th round


----------



## LL (Mar 12, 2011)

So far I have their first fight being the FOTY. I think Robbie was caught off guard by Hendricks, a guy whose known for having legit one punch KO power who suddenly used pitter patter volume style, the leg kicks really worked but Robbie came back and knocked him around.

I felt Robbie would have won the fight had he mixed it up and used some body shots when he had Hendricks hurt, he was dead up against the cage but Robbie missed out. Still their first fight was closed and I think Hendricks comes out with a more wresting based style and takes it.

Heart says Robbie, head says Hendricks. Just like the first fight. Will be rooting for Robbie to knock his head off.


----------



## hellholming (Jun 13, 2009)

Robbie's time is now.

in before Hendricks' whining after losing.


----------



## amoosenamedhank (Sep 2, 2009)

LL said:


> So far I have their first fight being the FOTY. I think Robbie was caught off guard by Hendricks, a guy whose known for having legit one punch KO power who suddenly used pitter patter volume style, the leg kicks really worked but Robbie came back and knocked him around.
> 
> I felt Robbie would have won the fight had he mixed it up and used some body shots when he had Hendricks hurt, he was dead up against the cage but Robbie missed out. Still their first fight was closed and I think Hendricks comes out with a more wresting based style and takes it.
> 
> Heart says Robbie, head says Hendricks. Just like the first fight. Will be rooting for Robbie to knock his head off.


I think this is pretty accurate. I think Hendricks is going to go for a much more wrestling based attack, or at least leave that in his hip pocket.

I guess that's the power of being a good wrestler. If your original game plan of striking isn't working, you always have that to fall back on. 

I really hope Robbie can KO Hendricks but I have a feeling we're looking at a ugly decision.


----------



## slapshot (May 4, 2007)

I dont think this is the same fight as the first, I have a hunch this one goes on way or the other early. 

Im a big Lawler fan and he's got a decent shot at winning but I think Hendricks will probably take this. I just hope they both show up injury free so we can get a solid accounting.

War Lawler!


----------



## Oax (Nov 23, 2014)

I think Lawler will actually take this fight and take it convincingly. He's improved just in his last two fights after the Hendricks fight alone. Plus he's active and humble and we need more champions like that in the UFC.



:thumbsup:


----------



## King Daisuke (Mar 25, 2013)

Ruthless Robbie Lawler by laughing at Johny's face. :thumbsup: Do you know what I mean? Does that make sense?


----------



## Voiceless (Nov 8, 2010)

slapshot said:


> I dont think this is the same fight as the first, I have a hunch this one goes on way or the other early.
> 
> Im a big Lawler fan and he's got a decent shot at winning but I think Hendricks will probably take this. I just hope they both show up injury free so we can get a solid accounting.
> 
> War Lawler!


I also think it won't resemble the first fight, but I don't think it'll be necessarily a quick fight, instead I can see it being a boring 5 round wrestlef*ck decision for Hendricks. Hendricks got hurt bad in the first fight and was lucky that Lawler gassed. He probably won't want to risk to get clocked again and goes for the safe option of wrestle LnP.


----------



## Iuanes (Feb 17, 2009)

Robbie Lawler winning would be too good of a story to happen and god forbid nice things happen in MMA.


----------



## marky420 (Oct 26, 2012)

Hilbilly gonna get murdered. Expecting some sick tdd from robbie in this one


----------



## Joabbuac (Jan 31, 2009)

Oax said:


> I think Lawler will actually take this fight and take it convincingly. He's improved just in his last two fights after the Hendricks fight alone. Plus he's active and humble and we need more champions like that in the UFC.
> 
> 
> 
> :thumbsup:


Has he improved?? In what way? I see no difference between the Lawler just before and now after the first Hendricks fight. It still might be enough for him to take the rematch though, Hendricks has to be on point again.


----------



## Rauno (Nov 20, 2009)

I hate Hendricks but want him to win since i don't really care about Lawler. I want Rory or Alves take the belt from Terrorist.


----------



## Joabbuac (Jan 31, 2009)

Anyone seen the poster for 181? 










I like it, better than the usual faceoff photo they always do. Apparently there is a comicbook fan working for the UFC now.


----------



## Rauno (Nov 20, 2009)

The poster has kind of old school vibe to it. Definitely one of the better works of recent times.


----------



## oldfan (Mar 14, 2010)

Rauno said:


> The poster has kind of old school vibe to it. Definitely one of the better works of recent times.


Substitute "DC." for "old school" and I agree.

and I'm a marvel fan.


----------



## Toxic (Mar 1, 2007)

Joabbuac said:


> Anyone seen the poster for 181?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Actually DC comics did the poster for UFC 181.


----------



## _RIVAL_ (Mar 7, 2008)

I don't know why these futile WWs even bicker over this title when Lombard is just gonna come and smear them into blood stains all over the octagon for having the nerve to even look at his WW title....


----------



## jonnyg4508 (Jan 30, 2010)

Rauno said:


> I hate Hendricks but want him to win since i don't really care about Lawler. I want Rory or Alves take the belt from Terrorist.


:laugh::laugh::laugh:

talk about holding on to the past.


----------



## _RIVAL_ (Mar 7, 2008)

jonnyg4508 said:


> :laugh::laugh::laugh:
> 
> talk about holding on to the past.




What's so funny?? Thiago Alves is more than capable of taking that WW world title......... 

In the WWE


----------



## Rauno (Nov 20, 2009)

jonnyg4508 said:


> :laugh::laugh::laugh:
> 
> talk about holding on to the past.


The keyword in my post was *want*, not saying it has a chance of happening. :sarcastic09:


----------



## jonnyg4508 (Jan 30, 2010)

Rauno said:


> The keyword in my post was *want*, not saying it has a chance of happening. :sarcastic09:


I want to win the lottery. But I don't go around posting I do.

I just think it is funny you included him. I'd love Chuck to come back and win a title. Or Big Nog to win the title as well. 

We can all hope I guess.


----------



## Old school fan (Aug 24, 2011)

Go Lawler! Most anticipated rematch along with Aldo vs Mendes here.


----------



## slapshot (May 4, 2007)

_RIVAL_ said:


> I don't know why these futile WWs even bicker over this title when Lombard is just gonna come and smear them into blood stains all over the octagon for having the nerve to even look at his WW title....


If Tim Boetsch and Yushin Okami can beat him, Im not sure he has the consistency to retain the title if he did win it.

I honestly am not sure he can beat either of them but Id be down to watch it.


----------



## Joabbuac (Jan 31, 2009)

jonnyg4508 said:


> I want to win the lottery. But I don't go around posting I do.



Uhhh... yea you do.


----------



## Ape City (May 27, 2007)

Ahhhhh im so pumped for this fight. I want Lawler to take it so bad.

Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## Hellboy (Mar 15, 2008)

Take it for what it's worth, but Chael said Hendricks was taken to the weigh ins in a wheelchair.


----------



## Oax (Nov 23, 2014)

The more and more I think about it the less likely I feel like this fight will be close like it was the first time. Hendricks looked just plain deathly at the weigh ins, but he looked horrible last time too. I think Lawler either takes his head off with a kick or Hendricks switches gears and wrestles Lawler to a one sided decision.

We'll see. Definitely can't wait for the card!




:thumbsup:


----------



## slapshot (May 4, 2007)

Hellboy said:


> Take it for what it's worth, but Chael said Hendricks was taken to the weigh ins in a wheelchair.


See that just is a big red flag and exactly what I didnt want to hear, If lawler wins I want it to be because he's the better fighter not the least injured, honestly it makes you wonder how many fights have been won due to poor health/injury.


----------



## Voiceless (Nov 8, 2010)

slapshot said:


> See that just is a big red flag and exactly what I didnt want to hear, If lawler wins I want it to be because he's the better fighter not the least injured, honestly it makes you wonder how many fights have been won due to poor health/injury.


In Hendricks' case, if true, it's probably rather due to bad weight cut.


----------



## slapshot (May 4, 2007)

Voiceless said:


> In Hendricks' case, if true, it's probably rather due to bad weight cut.


that would fall under poor health, a bad cut can totally change the outcome of a fight..

Im kind of bummed now. I hope this is just talk.


----------



## Hellboy (Mar 15, 2008)

I did think it was a unusually over the top celebration from making weight by Hendricks and Dolce.


----------



## Voiceless (Nov 8, 2010)

slapshot said:


> that would fall under poor health, a bad cut can totally change the outcome of a fight..


Of course it can change the outcome of a fight, but a bad weight cut is not an accident or a flu you caught by bad luck. A bad weight cut comes due to a fighter's choice and approach to training and preparation to the fight. The weight cut is part of what makes him a fighter (in the context of MMA). A bad weight cut comes from a fighter's gamble with the intent to rehydrate until the fight starts and have a weight advantage over his opponent. Obviously he thinks that he needs that weight advantage to win the fight. If he messes up his weight cut and consequently loses, than it makes him the worse fighter of the two fighting, because his strategy didn't pan out. I have absolutely zero compassion with fighters messing up their weight cut.


----------



## TanyaJade (Aug 31, 2010)

I literally have no idea who to pick here. Their last fight was so close.


----------



## EagleClaw29 (Oct 24, 2010)

I'm rooting for Lawlor. Worried if Hendricks bicep was injured as badly as some say....and he still won.


*GO THE RUTHLESS ONE*


----------



## TanyaJade (Aug 31, 2010)

God Hendricks looks awful


----------



## Woodenhead (Jan 5, 2010)

Rig wins round with late TD, probably.


----------



## UFC_OWNS (Jul 7, 2010)

Good first round 1, lawler 10-9, hendrix finding his groove though


----------



## TheAuger (Jun 30, 2011)

Hendricks 10-9


----------



## TanyaJade (Aug 31, 2010)

What's Robbie doing? Is he gassed?


----------



## edlavis88 (Jul 12, 2009)

Man Hendricks taking all the fun outta this one. Smart but ZZZZZZZ


----------



## TheAuger (Jun 30, 2011)

Hendricks 20-18


----------



## UFC_OWNS (Jul 7, 2010)

Sick fight so far, and great chin on hendrix


----------



## Woodenhead (Jan 5, 2010)

TanyaJade said:


> What's Robbie doing? Is he gassed?


Yeah IDK, did nothing other than throw 2 front kicks. JH, meanwhile, did some wrestlehumping. I'm falling asleep here.


----------



## edlavis88 (Jul 12, 2009)

Lawlers right hand must be broken. He hasntb thrown a right since round 1.


----------



## TheAuger (Jun 30, 2011)

Hendricks 30-27


----------



## TanyaJade (Aug 31, 2010)

This is ridiculous. 
Robbie is either hurt or pulling a Mousasi.


----------



## rallyman (Mar 15, 2010)

man Robbie just doesn't have anything for him at so far other than being a punching bag.

was really hoping for more from this fight


----------



## HorsepoweR (Jun 1, 2007)

Snoozefest. Robbie better be hurt or this is some bullshit.


----------



## EagleClaw29 (Oct 24, 2010)

Too Bad....lawlor Gassed & Toast


----------



## boatoar (May 14, 2010)

well shit this sucks. expected johny Dec but bet Robbie as a fan. dang. 

Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## boatoar (May 14, 2010)

Robbie not pulling trigger often. so much hype for a 30 second flurry and a nice front kick. rest is all johny. 

Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## Woodenhead (Jan 5, 2010)

HorsepoweR said:


> Snoozefest. Robbie better be hurt or this is some bullshit.


Yep.


----------



## TheAuger (Jun 30, 2011)

Hendricks 40-36


----------



## boatoar (May 14, 2010)

this shit's ovah.

Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## aerius (Nov 19, 2006)

Who knew that Hendricks would turn into Jon Fitch?


----------



## TanyaJade (Aug 31, 2010)

What an awful fight.
Super disappointing performance from Lawler. Totally blew his wad after the first three minutes and then checked out when Hendricks took all his shots like nothing.

This will go down as one of the worst rematches ever.


----------



## UFC_OWNS (Jul 7, 2010)

Sick fight 48-47 hendricks


----------



## edlavis88 (Jul 12, 2009)

48-47 Hendricks... Poor fight imo other than first + last 20 seconds


----------



## Woodenhead (Jan 5, 2010)

LOLer fought for the first and last 30 seconds of the fight.

:confused02:


----------



## John8204 (May 13, 2010)

C'mon judges screw Hendricks over...please screw him over.


----------



## rallyman (Mar 15, 2010)

where was that 60seconds of lawler for the other 24mins


----------



## TheAuger (Jun 30, 2011)

Hendricks 49-46 or 48-47


----------



## edlavis88 (Jul 12, 2009)

Rory MacDonald iz not empressed by your performance


----------



## UFC_OWNS (Jul 7, 2010)

Bullshit


----------



## Trix (Dec 15, 2009)

I might have given Lawler the 1st, 4th and 5th.


----------



## edlavis88 (Jul 12, 2009)

Hahaha


----------



## Woodenhead (Jan 5, 2010)

holy lolololol

lolol

lol

omg
omg


----------



## boatoar (May 14, 2010)

wtf. why not go all out earlier. I know its the end. but giving Way rounds sucked.

Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## John8204 (May 13, 2010)

Ha! Yes Yes Yes! F You Hendricks


----------



## aerius (Nov 19, 2006)

John8204 said:


> C'mon judges screw Hendricks over...please screw him over.


Wish granted!


----------



## Stapler (Nov 18, 2006)

Yessssss!!!!!!!!

Yesss!! I Dont Care If You Guys Dont Agree With That Decision! Yeahhh!!!! Lawler!!!


----------



## Hellboy (Mar 15, 2008)

Wow.


----------



## Woodenhead (Jan 5, 2010)

The judges obviously were not impressed with Jonny's boring wall & stall.

LOLOL


----------



## Rygu (Jul 21, 2008)

The judges made the right call, way to go Lawler.


----------



## HorsepoweR (Jun 1, 2007)

Lol. Wow. Sucks for Hendricks, he got ***** twice now for the belt. Lol


----------



## John8204 (May 13, 2010)

Greatest.Robbery.EVER


----------



## LL (Mar 12, 2011)

Hell yes.

That was so awesome, FOTY for Lawler.


----------



## rallyman (Mar 15, 2010)

holy crap!!!

cant wait for the press conference.
but cant see how you give 4 rounds to Robbie


----------



## UFC_OWNS (Jul 7, 2010)

Bull ******* shit, robbery


----------



## TanyaJade (Aug 31, 2010)

Wow, haha.

I gave Robbie the first and fifth. Definitely thought Hendricks took the second, third, and fourth.

I've never been this happy with a decision I disagreed with.


----------



## edlavis88 (Jul 12, 2009)

Bad decision but I'm pleased. Hendricks deserved to lose he stalled for 15 mins of a 25 min fight.

Hendricks must have been pissed of real bad for them not to interview him.


----------



## Sportsman 2.0 (Jul 10, 2012)

:jaw: I was rooting for Lawler, but... really? :laugh:


----------



## boatoar (May 14, 2010)

OMG!!!

Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## Woodenhead (Jan 5, 2010)

John8204 said:


> C'mon judges screw Hendricks over...please screw him over.


:thumb02: :thumb02: :thumb02:

Not that I'm a Lawler fanboy - I like him well enough, but that's it - just that JH is an idiot who I wanted to lose badly.

This may be a "bad" decision, but it still feels GREAT haha

If judges are going to score against wall & stall, I'm OK with that.


----------



## Stapler (Nov 18, 2006)

I don't care if Hendricks should have out pointed him on the score cards. Toward the end of the fight, he just kept hugging his legs every chance he got even though the referee demanded he do something. He wanted to just coast in the worst way and that wasn't allowed this time.

New champion ladies and gentlemen! "Ruthless" Robbie Lawler! Awesome feel good story.


----------



## TheAuger (Jun 30, 2011)

That's a screw job. Oh well, Hendricks tried to slow this fight down & it cost him.

I really don't see how you could give Lawlor rounds 2 or 3. Rounds 1 & 4 were close. But 49-46 Lawlor? Complete shenanigans.


----------



## boatoar (May 14, 2010)

YESSSSSSSSSSS

Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## 420atalon (Sep 13, 2008)

Rubber match will happen now. If Hendricks shows up in decent shape and not like he did tonight he should win easily.


----------



## boatoar (May 14, 2010)

love this. **** stalling wrestlers. 

Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## Thermopyle (Jul 1, 2010)

I'll never pay for or watch another UFC event again.


----------



## aerius (Nov 19, 2006)

John8204 said:


> Greatest.Robbery.EVER


48-47 I can see depending on how the 2nd round gets counted (I scored it 48-47 Hendricks, giving him the 2nd), but 49-46 is total WTF.


----------



## Life B Ez (Jan 23, 2010)

Rory macdonald is not happy. Better start looking for someone to fight.


----------



## TheAuger (Jun 30, 2011)

boatoar said:


> love this. **** stalling wrestlers.


Sure he was wall stalling, but outside of the first 90 seconds in round 1 & the 5th round, he was winning just about every exchange in between. 

This was just a bad decision.


----------



## UKMMAGURU (Nov 15, 2009)

Thermopyle said:


> I'll never pay for or watch another UFC event again.


LOLLL


----------



## Stapler (Nov 18, 2006)

I understand why Lawler got the fourth round as well. Hendricks was content just coasting and hugging his legs, and at the end of the round, Lawler started teeing off while Hendricks was stalling and covering up. That probably put Lawler over in the judges eyes and they scored it better than Hendricks stalling and few exchange wins. They probably thought Hendricks covering up and waiting for the bell was a sign of him being exhausted and being in survival mode. Lawler clearly won the 5th round easily, and in the first round, they scored Lawlers very early offense more than they scored Hendricks offense later in the round. It's a bit of a stretch, but for those reasons, I can see why it was 48-47 for Lawler. 49-46 was funny though.

Good win for Lawler. I'm glad he has finally won UFC gold after all these years. It truly is a feel good story and I'm happy for him. This made my night.


----------



## VolcomX311 (Aug 18, 2009)

I thought Hendrick's had it for sure, but I'm not mad Robbie won. We already had a champion in this division who could play the scorecards in their favor, I'm glad there's a new champion who's in it to fight. I was rooting for Hendricks going into this fight, but the shameless holding for the sake of points was too much for me.


----------



## Rygu (Jul 21, 2008)

The fight was very close and since Robbie fought to win and Hendricks clearly fought to not lose, I'm happy he won.


----------



## Shoegazer (Jun 23, 2007)

I had it for Hendricks, but no doubt in my mind that if that fight continued, Lawler was going to finish him. This is the best puzzling result I've ever seen. It feels right.


----------



## John8204 (May 13, 2010)

TheAuger said:


> Sure he was wall stalling, but outside of the first 90 seconds in round 1 & the 5th round, he was winning just about every exchange in between.
> 
> This was just a bad decision.


Yup he should be champion but you know what **** him. This is the fight business not the slap the other guys shins and rest your head on his balls business. 

No fighter should ever get two title fights coming off loses. Let Robbie face Rory and Matt Brown and give Hendricks GSP and Lombard. The judges may have screwed Johny but Johny was screwing us like his name was Cosby.


----------



## Stapler (Nov 18, 2006)

Hendricks was mentally done and just wanted the fight to end. I can still see why a judge would score the first and fourth round for Lawler. The decision isn't that crazy. Hendricks was exhausted and just hugged his legs toward the end riding out the clock on purpose. I'm glad Lawler won. He deserves the title.


----------



## Life B Ez (Jan 23, 2010)

The worst part of this is the massive amount of bitching and whining Hendricks is going to do.


----------



## UFC_OWNS (Jul 7, 2010)

Life B Ez said:


> The worst part of this is the massive amount of bitching and whining Hendricks is going to do.


And he deserves to, GSP and lawler both lost their fights to him and yet 2/3 times johny was robbed blind.


----------



## Soakked (Feb 5, 2007)

I thought Robbie won rounds 1 and 5 and Hendricks won 2 and 3. The 4th round is up in the air for me, but I think Robbie should have gotten it because he gained momentum and finished stronger. But it was a close fight and Hendricks looked amazing in the 2nd and 3rd rounds (and beginning of 4th).


----------



## Trix (Dec 15, 2009)

Sherdog and mmajunkie gave Robbie the 4th.

http://www.sherdog.com/news/news/UF...y-Updates-78287#johny-hendricks-robbie-lawler

http://mmajunkie.com/2014/12/ufc-181-play-by-play-and-live-results


----------



## attention (Oct 18, 2006)

John8204 said:


> Yup he should be champion but you know what **** him. This is the fight business not the *slap the other guys shins and rest your head on his balls* business.


THIS!

...exactly, **** him :thumbsup:


----------



## Rygu (Jul 21, 2008)

John8204 said:


> Yup he should be champion but you know what **** him. This is the fight business not the slap the other guys shins and rest your head on his balls business.
> 
> No fighter should ever get two title fights coming off loses. Let Robbie face Rory and Matt Brown and give Hendricks GSP and Lombard. The judges may have screwed Johny but Johny was screwing us like his name was Cosby.


This sums it up nicely.


----------



## UFC_OWNS (Jul 7, 2010)

Trix said:


> Sherdog and mmajunkie gave Robbie the 4th.
> 
> http://www.sherdog.com/news/news/UF...y-Updates-78287#johny-hendricks-robbie-lawler
> 
> http://mmajunkie.com/2014/12/ufc-181-play-by-play-and-live-results


Good thing they aren't judges either, how do you give robbie the 4th? Go ahead someone explain it to me. What getting leg kicked and hit all round except the last 30 seconds he got hit with some sprawl shots and that wins it?


----------



## Stapler (Nov 18, 2006)

Soakked said:


> I thought Robbie won rounds 1 and 5 and Hendricks won 2 and 3. The 4th round is up in the air for me, but I think Robbie should have gotten it because he gained momentum and finished stronger. But it was a close fight and Hendricks looked amazing in the 2nd and 3rd rounds (and beginning of 4th).


I agree with this. I can see why the judges would score the fourth for Robbie. Toward the end, Hendricks was hugging his legs and riding out the clock. Lawler then took that opportunity to tee off on him and Hendricks did nothing to defend against this. He literally just kept hanging on to Lawler's legs and covered up waiting for the round to end. In the judges eyes, they probably thought Hendricks was exhausted and just trying to survive. We all know when things happen toward the end of a round, it can potentially make a difference on the score cards for that round. That's what happened here in my opinion. That moment made a huge difference in favor of Lawler.


----------



## slapshot (May 4, 2007)

I had it rounds 1 and 2 to lawler, 3 and 4 Hendricks with Robbie taking the 5th.

I was a bit worried Lawler would get robbed again.


----------



## Trix (Dec 15, 2009)

Hendricks fought like a true american.

Going to war, trying to takedown the enemy.

With no exit strategy.

edit



Stapler said:


> I agree with this. I can see why the judges would score the fourth for Robbie. Toward the end, Hendricks was hugging his legs and riding out the clock. Lawler then took that opportunity to tee off on him and Hendricks did nothing to defend against this. He literally just kept hanging on to Lawler's legs and covered up waiting for the round to end. In the judges eyes, they probably thought Hendricks was exhausted and just trying to survive. We all know when things happen toward the end of a round, it can potentially make a difference on the score cards for that round. That's what happened here in my opinion. That moment made a huge difference in favor of Lawler.


I gave Lawler the 4th. He had Hendricks pinned beneath him at the end of the round and unloaded a ton of shots on him. Most significant damage done in the round, thought he deserved the nod.


----------



## M.C (Jul 5, 2008)

Great fight, and I loved the results.


----------



## Stapler (Nov 18, 2006)

Trix said:


> I gave Lawler the 4th. He had Hendricks pinned beneath him at the end of the round and unloaded a ton of shots on him. Most significant damage done in the round, thought he deserved the nod.


I agree, Hendricks wasn't intelligently defending himself either. Like I said, literally just holding on until the clock ran out. I was starting to wonder if he was seriously hurt and if a TKO was coming.


----------



## RangerClydeTheBlue (Jul 11, 2012)

Robbie annoyed me tonight. He finished like my favour fighter ever but for those 3 rounds in the middle he barely threw a punch. What was his problem?

I am happy none the less. I had it 1 & 5 to Robbie and 2, 3 and 4 to Hendricks. I don't feel 4 was all that close. Robbie finished quite strong but Hendricks had the exchanges previous to it. Hendricks looked terrible right at the end though with the horrid takedown attempts. Really glad he lost. I will be happy to watch Hendricks fight in future but I'm really glad it's not for the title cause Robbie is the man for the job as long as exciting championship fights is concerned. I hope he fights Lombard soon cause that fight would be insane. Rory has a great chance to take the belt which is fairly good since Rory has been a guy with "potential" for soooo long. Robbie winning the title essentially opens it all up. Robbie is a very exciting, very skillful potential finisher, who is also quite beatable with the right gameplan. The boxing game between Rory and Lawler would be great (this time at least).


----------



## amoosenamedhank (Sep 2, 2009)

I can't even begin to explain how happy I am with this decision. I'm so sick of 'wall n stall' being counted as control.

Johny lost to GSP because he coasted in the 5th and now he lost this fight because he spent so much time stalling.

Hendricks seems to have a low fight IQ


----------



## slapshot (May 4, 2007)

John8204 said:


> Greatest.Robbery.EVER


BS, this was not a robbery at all.

Close fight and Lawler pulled it out.


----------



## UFC_OWNS (Jul 7, 2010)

amoosenamedhank said:


> I can't even begin to explain how happy I am with this decision. I'm so sick of 'wall n stall' being counted as control.
> 
> Johny lost to GSP because he coasted in the 5th and now he lost this fight because he spent so much time stalling.
> 
> Hendricks seems to have a low fight IQ


I do agree with the last part, he was outstriking lawler in nearly every exchange for the most part but wasted energy and time with bad takedown attempts which AI really dont get. Either way still hendricks won, no one gave 2 shits about stupid gsp getting the nod against hendricks for his ineffective fighting.


----------



## suspectchin (Apr 29, 2014)

I'm happy.


----------



## Toxic (Mar 1, 2007)

Thought Hendricks won tonight but thought Lawlee won the first fight so this seems like the world righting itself. 


Sent from Verticalsports.com App


----------



## Woodenhead (Jan 5, 2010)

Rory up next.

How much fun would Lawler vs. Lombard be?

I'm gonna be giddy for weeks over how shitty Hendricks must feel right now.


----------



## Life B Ez (Jan 23, 2010)

UFC_OWNS said:


> And he deserves to, GSP and lawler both lost their fights to him and yet 2/3 times johny was robbed blind.


Not that it matters now, but Hendricks lost to GSP because he literally stopped fighting after the second round.


----------



## UFC_OWNS (Jul 7, 2010)

Life B Ez said:


> Not that it matters now, but Hendricks lost to GSP because he literally stopped fighting after the second round.


I disagree with that whoel heartedly, but more thant hat gsp didnt land anything huge the whole fight anyways.


----------



## RangerClydeTheBlue (Jul 11, 2012)

slapshot said:


> BS, this was not a robbery at all.
> 
> Close fight and Lawler pulled it out.


This. I hate the word "robbery". A robbery is Sanchez Vs Pearson. This fight was close, and I reckon almost everyone had it 1 and 5 to Lawler and 2 and 3 to Hendricks. The 4th saw Hendricks control on the feet but he took loads of damage at the end. It's easy to see how a judge could give Robbie the 4th, so it's in no way a robbery.


----------



## Toxic (Mar 1, 2007)

UFC_OWNS said:


> I disagree with that whoel heartedly, but more thant hat gsp didnt land anything huge the whole fight anyways.



Gsp landed some nasty head kicks unfortunately we were just beginning to suspect what Lawlee proved tonight that Hendricks is immune to head kicks 


Sent from Verticalsports.com App


----------



## UFC_OWNS (Jul 7, 2010)

Toxic said:


> Gsp landed some nasty head kicks unfortunately we were just beginning to suspect what Lawlee proved tonight that Hendricks is immune to head kicks
> 
> 
> Sent from Verticalsports.com App


Well if they did land hendricks must have the best chin ever because I didn't se ehim flinch once int hat fight. In fact if there was one fight I would say hendricks ever lost besides rick story is the first lawler fight, even then I had hendricks scraping that with rounds 1,2 and 5.

This is a real shame because I really like lawler too but now his fairy tale story is completely tainted for me. give rory the next title fight I dont wanna see a trilogy burned so quick liek jds vs cain was.


----------



## John8204 (May 13, 2010)

UFC_OWNS said:


> I disagree with that whoel heartedly, but more thant hat gsp didnt land anything huge the whole fight anyways.


GSP came closer ending the fight in the first with guillotine than Hendrick's elbows off the cage.

If I was scoring this fight it would have been 49-46 Hendricks. Because MMA rules you got to do damage and drop guys to win over grappling and Lawler didn't do that. But I am perfectly happy with this decision.

You say he got screwed against Lawler and GSP well okay if he lived in a bubble and had no track record I would agree with your position. But Mike Pierce...split decision, Josh Koscheck...split decision, Carlos Condit...29-28 close fight, TJ Grant...majority decision the guy has spent his entire career coasting on close fights. He has 1 30-27 fight in his entire career, I have no sympathy for a guy who takes rounds off.


----------



## slapshot (May 4, 2007)

I was surprised Lawler had big headkicks, he's defiantly diversified his game.


----------



## UFC_OWNS (Jul 7, 2010)

John8204 said:


> GSP came closer ending the fight in the first with guillotine than Hendrick's elbows off the cage.
> 
> If I was scoring this fight it would have been 49-46 Hendricks. Because MMA rules you got to do damage and drop guys to win over grappling and Lawler didn't do that. But I am perfectly happy with this decision.
> 
> You say he got screwed against Lawler and GSP well okay if he lived in a bubble and had no track record I would agree with your position. But Mike Pierce...split decision, Josh Koscheck...split decision, Carlos Condit...29-28 close fight, TJ Grant...majority decision the guy has spent his entire career coasting on close fights. He has 1 30-27 fight in his entire career, I have no sympathy for a guy who takes rounds off.


I don't disagree that he has erratic fight iq and if he just stood with everyone instead of wrestling at inappropriate time she would be unbeatable. But the fact is all those fights as close as they were, were all clearly his by definition of round by round.


----------



## Toxic (Mar 1, 2007)

UFC_OWNS said:


> Well if they did land hendricks must have the best chin ever because I didn't se ehim flinch once int hat fight. In fact if there was one fight I would say hendricks ever lost besides rick story is the first lawler fight, even then I had hendricks scraping that with rounds 1,2 and 5.
> 
> 
> 
> This is a real shame because I really like lawler too but now his fairy tale story is completely tainted for me. give rory the next title fight I dont wanna see a trilogy burned so quick liek jds vs cain was.


Hendricks didn't flinch off lawyers head kicks tonight either multiple times. Guy has a Chin of granite



Sent from Verticalsports.com App


----------



## slapshot (May 4, 2007)

John8204 said:


> Because MMA rules you got to do damage and drop guys to win over grappling and Lawler didn't do that. But I am perfectly happy with this decision.


What the hell? I take it you've been drinking tonight er something?


----------



## RangerClydeTheBlue (Jul 11, 2012)

slapshot said:


> I was surprised Lawler had big headkicks, he's defiantly diversified his game.


Lawler's left kicks have been looking amazing recently.


----------



## amoosenamedhank (Sep 2, 2009)

I think MMA judging typically favors weak wrestling stalls so when they were announcing the decision based off typical judging, I was fairly certain Hendricks was going to get the nod... But I'm 100% ready for this to be the new trend in MMA judging.

Lawler sprawled those takedowns and in my opinion neutralized those positions. Yes, Hendricks was holding him to the fence but the takedown failed and the action stalled...this is the position which Johny typically scores most his control time..but in my mind this is neutral.

So when Lawler stuffs the head and starts landing strikes, it's easy to say that's an advantage to Lawler.


----------



## UFC_OWNS (Jul 7, 2010)

amoosenamedhank said:


> I think MMA judging typically favors weak wrestling stalls so when they were announcing the decision based off typical judging, I was fairly certain Hendricks was going to get the nod... But I'm 100% ready for this to be the new trend in MMA judging.


You know that might be fine if it was true but theres 2 flaws. 1 if this is true no one in the world was informed of it and 2 we KNOW that this isn't gonna be the new norm of judging it will continue to be inconsistent as ever rendering this decision even more stupid.


----------



## Calminian (Feb 1, 2009)

Does Hendricks really have to chew at the press conference. Kinda gross.


----------



## UFC_OWNS (Jul 7, 2010)

D bag fans yelling for robbie when he walks, should get kicked out for that shit.


----------



## RangerClydeTheBlue (Jul 11, 2012)

amoosenamedhank said:


> I think MMA judging typically favors weak wrestling stalls so when they were announcing the decision based off typical judging, I was fairly certain Hendricks was going to get the nod... But I'm 100% ready for this to be the new trend in MMA judging.
> 
> Lawler sprawled those takedowns and in my opinion neutralized those positions. Yes, Hendricks was holding him to the fence but the takedown failed and the action stalled...this is the position which Johny typically scores most his control time..but in my mind this is neutral.
> 
> So when Lawler stuffs the head and starts landing strikes, it's easy to say that's an advantage to Lawler.


Yeah defo. I still scored it to Hendricks because my mind's probably conditioned to MMA judging, but 100% fighting should be based on DAMAGE and that aspect alone.


----------



## amoosenamedhank (Sep 2, 2009)

UFC_OWNS said:


> You know that might be fine if it was true but theres 2 flaws. 1 if this is true no one in the world was informed of it and 2 we KNOW that this isn't gonna be the new norm of judging it will continue to be inconsistent as ever rendering this decision even more stupid.


I added more to my previous...

What do you want the judges to do, hold a press conference to say they're going to not credit stalling? The fact that stalling ever won anyone a fight is what's truly flawed.

You're probably right on the inconsistency going forward but I can hope


----------



## RangerClydeTheBlue (Jul 11, 2012)

What can you really do with judging? Every suggestion you guys have will already be done. Boxing is worse. If any of you watch boxing in the UK, you'll flip the fuk out at how absolutely disgustingly bad the referees are regarding stopping fights. Literally a light breeze for the underdog and the fight is finished.


----------



## UFC_OWNS (Jul 7, 2010)

amoosenamedhank said:


> I added more to my previous...
> 
> What do you want the judges to do, hold a press conference to say they're going to not credit stalling? The fact that stalling ever won anyone a fight is what's truly flawed.
> 
> You're probably right on the inconsistency going forward but I can hope


All I am saying if we going for the narrative that stalling and ineffectiveness doesn't win you fights anymore then gsp should really more than ever never have gotten the decision over Johny. 

And more than that i'm sick of close fights or whatever being a coin flip, either changed the criteria to damage and aggression alone wins you fights or do metamorphis or bushido rules and any card that goes the distance ends in an automatic draw.


----------



## aerius (Nov 19, 2006)

ClydebankBlitz said:


> Yeah defo. I still scored it to Hendricks because my mind's probably conditioned to MMA judging, but 100% fighting should be based on DAMAGE and that aspect alone.


With normal UFC judging I'd give both fights to Hendricks. On other hand, with Pride judging where they score the fight as a whole and put more weight on damange, the first fight goes to Lawler for sure and this one probably goes to Lawler as well.

I still think Hendricks had it 48-47, but I gotta say I'm pretty damn happy that the judges gave the decision to Lawler. The way Hendricks was stalling was pissing me off.


----------



## RangerClydeTheBlue (Jul 11, 2012)

UFC_OWNS said:


> or bushido rules and any card that goes the distance ends in an automatic draw.


Edgar Vs Swanson would have ended with 7 draws lol.


----------



## amoosenamedhank (Sep 2, 2009)

UFC_OWNS said:


> All I am saying if we going for the narrative that stalling and ineffectiveness doesn't win you fights anymore then gsp should really more than ever never have gotten the decision over Johny.
> 
> And more than that i'm sick of close fights or whatever being a coin flip, either changed the criteria to damage and aggression alone wins you fights or do metamorphis or bushido rules and any card that goes the distance ends in an automatic draw.


I think we can agree that the inconsistency is terrible and regardless of how they decide to judge, they need to try and make the decisions more uniform... Now with that said... My views on judging are obviously the correct ones ?


----------



## RangerClydeTheBlue (Jul 11, 2012)

MORE uniform? After the Reebok thread I thought it'd be the opposite.


----------



## UFC_OWNS (Jul 7, 2010)

ClydebankBlitz said:


> Edgar Vs Swanson would have ended with 7 draws lol.


Well we could still keep the 5 rounds format lol, it doesn't need to be 2 like in bushido.


----------



## amoosenamedhank (Sep 2, 2009)

ClydebankBlitz said:


> MORE uniform? After the Reebok thread I thought it'd be the opposite.


Haha touche


----------



## cookiefritas (Jun 17, 2011)

Odd fight, Hendricks looked in control from the 2nd round on and was winning the rounds any way you look at it. 

He didn't need to stall as Robbie was sitting on his punches and looking for a one punch KO, but was getting his lead leg wrecked while just standing in front of JH. 

I don't know what was in JH head but he made a mistake at the end of the 4th round but willingly getting in the fetal position and trying to hump robbie's leg. He got his ribs blasted on the last 10 seconds of the 4th round. He inexplicably did the same thing in the 5th round, but only this time there was a minute left in the round and the rib shots must had really taken his gas tank to zero. 

Good fight, can't wait to see what happens in the trilogy.


----------



## EVERLOST (May 28, 2007)

I thought Johnny won the GSP fight , lost the first Lawler fight, and won this fight.......none of those decisions went that direction at all. Dont really see how Robbie won. Whichever judge scored that 49-46 must of been watching the Hendricks/ GSP fight on the monitor and forgot which one was Hendricks.


----------



## dsmjrv (Jan 27, 2010)

upon first viewing i thought hendricks would get the decision.. i tend to score fights as a whole rather than round for round.. i thought robbie won the first fight as a whole but understood the judges decision.. in this fight i thought hendricks won the fight as a whole and was very surprised by the decision..

however i am not unhappy with it, i wish more fights were scored like this.. wall n stall and lay and pray may be dominant positions but when nothing is done with it i am happy to score it against the imposer because essentially it is stalling..

i scored it 234 for hendricks, but i think i have been conditioned to view fights from crappy ignorant judges point of view.. 

i mean if hendricks vs. condit was judged this way condit would have won... and i scored that for condit too..


----------



## Trix (Dec 15, 2009)

I think Hendricks would have decisively won, had he not left his head between Lawler's legs everytime his takedown failed.

He needed a better exit strategy for when his takedowns failed & burned too much energy in that position.


----------



## Ape City (May 27, 2007)

I was honestly shocked at the decision. I thought Hendricks took the fight via decision. I can def see the case being made for 1 4 and 5 tho and to be honest I am thrilled to see Lawler win. Just didn't see it coming.


----------



## Sportsman 2.0 (Jul 10, 2012)

Funny I can see some who criticized me for celebrating CB being screwed against Boetsch, after acting like a utter moron throughout that fight, are now very much happy Hendricks was robbed.


----------



## Oax (Nov 23, 2014)

I thought Hendricks won 1, 2, and 3. It's probably a good thing I'm not a judge because it seems that no one else scored the fight that way. Lawler looked horrible for the last half of the first and the second and third. I guess you could make a case for him winning the first. I thought for sure Hendricks was either going to finish him in the fourth or the fight would get more one sided but man Lawler turned things around. 




:thumbsup:


----------



## rabakill (Apr 22, 2007)

One thing is with Joe and Goldie commenting it biases things so much that it's hard to tell the actual flow of the fight. Watch the fights with no commentary and it will be easier without the huge bias, they are great at analyzing different situations in isolation but analyzing fights they are terrible at and so often skew the fans perceptions of fights.


----------



## Stun Gun (Oct 24, 2012)

I had Lawler taking rounds 1, 4, 5
Hendricks took 2,3 . 

Lawler got the better exchanges in the 1st and 4th. Hendricks didn't land much in the 4th, had a takedown that he did nothing with, at least when GSP took you down he would control you or land shots. 

Neither guy overly impressed me in this fight though. I've watched the fight 3 times, I can see how both guys win. But I have Lawler winning by a bit here.

Lawler landed the better strikes, was more accurate, stuffed a lot of takedowns

Hendricks landed some good shots, had takedowns, but didn't do much with any takedowns


----------



## AmdM (Apr 13, 2010)

You know there's a corrupt judge in the house
when you have a 49-46 in this fight.

Anyway, glad Robbie won, he looked like a wild beast in that last minute, i´m sure we would have mauled Hendricks if there was another extra minute in that round.


----------



## Vale_Tudo (Nov 18, 2007)

I urge everyone to rewatch this fight objectively without commentary.


----------



## Stun Gun (Oct 24, 2012)

Vale_Tudo said:


> I urge everyone to rewatch this fight objectively without commentary.


This here. Was so bad, and biased. I thought it was a close fight, but Lawler won. And it wasn't a blow out like Rogan was saying


----------



## UFC_OWNS (Jul 7, 2010)

Ahh but it was, in fact rogan was fawning more over robbies kicks and round 4 and 5 work more than anything. Meanwhile johny landed a shit ton of leg kicks and punch combos in rounds 2-4. Round 1 you can even argue was johnys but I am being objective by giving it to robbie. Rogan doesn't influence me ever.


----------



## Hammerlock2.0 (Jun 17, 2009)

HOLY SHIT!!!

Great decision. I don't care how the fight went and who won what round, I don't care about the 10-9 must system, at the end of the fight Robbie had Hendricks beat.


----------



## Sportsman 2.0 (Jul 10, 2012)

I watched at Combate TV. Everyone thought Hendricks got Robbied.


----------



## gigogreco (Nov 10, 2010)

UFC_OWNS said:


> Ahh but it was, in fact rogan was fawning more over robbies kicks and round 4 and 5 work more than anything. Meanwhile johny landed a shit ton of leg kicks and punch combos in rounds 2-4. Round 1 you can even argue was johnys but I am being objective by giving it to robbie. Rogan doesn't influence me ever.


when you need to argue, that others should watch the fight on mute, then the argument is of absolutely zero value to me.

like we are a bunch of retards, who are yet to discover, the recipe for icecubes. 

i cant speak for anyone else, but more often then not, i actually disagree with those two

I had it 3-1-1 hendricks. that would be 49-47. I would have no problem with 49-46 or 48-47 , if they were in favor of hendricks.


----------



## UFC_OWNS (Jul 7, 2010)

Exactly, often they both just annoy me especially lately and go au contraire to what they both are saying. I can accept a 48-47 hendricks at worst. I hate the people who come out after these fights and then make arguments on how it wasn't a bad call or robbery just because they don't like the guy or his style or want to be a contrarian.


----------



## Stun Gun (Oct 24, 2012)

I'm a big Hendricks fan, and I rewatched the fight but I still feel like Lawler had the better exchanges to win a 48-47.


----------



## Joabbuac (Jan 31, 2009)

Vale_Tudo said:


> I urge everyone to rewatch this fight objectively without commentary.


People always say this... But to me, one person cannot see everything, the commentators spot the stuff i miss. What people should do is actually *watch* the fight, rather than just listen.


----------



## UFC_OWNS (Jul 7, 2010)

^^ exactly which is what I do anyways, I mainly only listem for sounds of shots to the body and head. Rogan being biased towards something is pretty much just background noise.


----------



## amoosenamedhank (Sep 2, 2009)

UFC_OWNS said:


> I hate the people who come out after these fights and then make arguments on how it wasn't a bad call or robbery just because they don't like the guy or his style or want to be a contrarian.


I hate people that come out after these fights and then make arguments on how bad of a call or how it was a robbery just because they don't like the guy, or his style or want to be contrarian.

See what I did there... You're mad at people in this thread for believing their own opinion and not yours....


----------



## UFC_OWNS (Jul 7, 2010)

amoosenamedhank said:


> I hate people that come out after these fights and then make arguments on how bad of a call or how it was a robbery just because they don't like the guy, or his style or want to be contrarian.
> 
> See what I did there... You're mad at people in this thread for believing their own opinion and not yours....


No I did not at all, in no way, shape or form did I say that. I'm saying that people will watch a fight like gsp vs hendricks or this fight and they will see that most people pick one to win and they make silly arguments on purpose to say why the controversial winner deserved the win. 

They will purposely fabricate what really happens in a round in a summary of a play by play to make it same like their opinion was right. I'm asking for reasons how you could possibly give you lawler round 4 after doing nothing for 4 and a half mintue sof that round and even more pressing round 2.


----------



## LL (Mar 12, 2011)

49-46 was the wrong score. I had Lawler winning 48-47 though. He did amazing attacking while using the sprawl.


----------



## amoosenamedhank (Sep 2, 2009)

UFC_OWNS said:


> No I did not at all, in no way, shape or form did I say that. I'm saying that people will watch a fight like gsp vs hendricks or this fight and they will see that most people pick one to win and they make silly arguments on purpose to say why the controversial winner deserved the win.
> 
> They will purposely fabricate what really happens in a round in a summary of a play by play to make it same like their opinion was right. I'm asking for reasons how you could possibly give you lawler round 4 after doing nothing for 4 and a half mintue sof that round and even more pressing round 2.


People have told you multiple times why they think Lawler won the fight but you're just discrediting their opinion by calling it fanboi opinionated nonsense. So why should anyone else waste their time trying to accept your open challenge to explain how Lawler won if you've already shown you're just going to immediately dismiss their opinion and call them a follower.

I'm actually shocked at how many people are agreeing with this decision. I was laughing with a buddy right before I signed on here about how this forum was most likely burning itself down as cries for robbery have been popular in the past. 

As I mentioned before, I think this decision was good for the sport and I think if wrestlers know the fights will be scored like this, it can only improve the quality of fights.


----------



## BrutalKO (Oct 5, 2006)

...Lawler's TDD is pretty phenomenal. That and the huge flurry at the end of the fight I think won it for Robbie. Lawler stuffed 12 of 17 shots by Johny. Amazing considering Hendricks had full use of his right arm this time. Robbie so deserves this title. It's been a hell of a long time coming. He's given us some of the best highlights ever. Lawler has certainly peaked and Rory will give Robbie a nice re-test but MacDonald will lose to Robbie again. I really would like to see GSP jump back in the mix and stir up the pot bigtime. Congrats to the Ruthless one...


----------



## Vale_Tudo (Nov 18, 2007)

Joabbuac said:


> People always say this... But to me, one person cannot see everything, the commentators spot the stuff i miss. What people should do is actually *watch* the fight, rather than just listen.


Fair enough. 
When I watched this with commentary from Rogan I thought Hendricks won. I mean, Hendricks had so many leg kicks, how much longer can Lawler stand on that leg? oh and Lawler had broken his right hand at one point.

Rogan made a huge point how Hendricks had won the first three rounds and went on how Robbie needed a 10-7 to win this fight.


Then you re-watch, just watch the fight and you notice how this fight wasnt such a blowout like Rogan made you belive. Its close. 

I feel the first round was the deciding one which I could see go either way. Cant wait to see the official scorecards.


----------



## Toxic (Mar 1, 2007)

UFC_OWNS said:


> No I did not at all, in no way, shape or form did I say that. I'm saying that people will watch a fight like gsp vs hendricks or this fight and they will see that most people pick one to win and they make silly arguments on purpose to say why the controversial winner deserved the win.
> 
> 
> 
> They will purposely fabricate what really happens in a round in a summary of a play by play to make it same like their opinion was right. I'm asking for reasons how you could possibly give you lawler round 4 after doing nothing for 4 and a half mintue sof that round and even more pressing round 2.



I didn't give Lawler the round but I am guessing they were scoring octagon control for Lawler. The rules are kinda vague on octagon control on how to score it when a fighter is failing to secure the td but his opponent is unable to get off the fence. Usually you see it scored for the guy who keeps his opponent on the fence but I think because Hendricks was keeping his head down between Lawlers legs that he was clearly and constantly going for the td and that Robbie was defending that and therefore dictating where the fight took place. That is at least the best explanation I can come up with for giving Lawler a 3rd round. 


Sent from Verticalsports.com App


----------



## Canadian Psycho (Apr 22, 2007)

Rory would steamroll the Lawler we saw last night. 

Dat belt is coming back to Canada.


----------



## kc1983 (May 27, 2007)

I need to rewatch the fight. 
I thought they were gonna give Hendricks the nod, considering that he landed 5 takedowns and while he was not active on the ground he was active on the feet with those leg kicks. However, Robbie stuffed so many TD's, caused more damage and was more aggressive. I'm really happy with the decision and as others have said, it is good for the sport.

In that 5th round Lawler was just unstoppable. Nothing was gonna put him away. The toughest, most durable guy in the UFC in my opinion. 
He broke Hendricks in the 5th. Those elbows to the body! Maaaan!

Very close fight, but I'm happy Lawler got the win! 


Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## King Daisuke (Mar 25, 2013)

I just watched the fight and I have tears in my eyes. Man, what a feel good story this was!

RUTHLESS ROBBIE LAWLER!


----------



## oldfan (Mar 14, 2010)

I haven't seen it yet but I sure am happy for Robbie and proud to see another MFS champion in the UFC.


----------



## slapshot (May 4, 2007)

Oax said:


> I thought Hendricks won 1, 2, and 3. It's probably not a good thing I'm a judge because it seems that no one else scored the fight that way. Lawler looked horrible for the last half of the first and the second and third. I guess you could make a case for him winning the first. I thought for sure Hendricks was either going to finish him in the fourth or the fight would get more one sided but man Lawler turned things around.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I wouldn't worry about it, most people here dont try and score the fight according to the scoring criteria. 

Lawler won that fight legitimately, no robbery or gift decision. Effective striking means damage, you may hear people try and argue "cleaner" strikes" but thats garbage, cleaner strikes dont matter if they are less effective IE damage. 

It can be looked up, the striking criteria is damage first and has been forever.


----------



## hellholming (Jun 13, 2009)

Haha! yes!!!

F*ck you Hendricks!


----------



## slapshot (May 4, 2007)

HorsepoweR said:


> Lol. Wow. Sucks for Hendricks, he got ***** twice now for the belt. Lol


Bias much?


----------



## King Daisuke (Mar 25, 2013)

You seriously couldn't make up a better story than Robbie Lawler's. Everything from him watching disappointed as he was losing the last fight because of a takedown, getting right back to work, EARNING another title fight, walking out to ******* _Hold On, I'm Coming_ , starting the fight like a madman, and finally EARNING the victory by beating Hendricks like a government mule in the fifth round with one of the sickest flurries ever. That's how you fight when you want to win! That's how you fight championship fights!

I thought Robbie clearly won 1-4-5. When he was smashing Hendrick's ribs at the end of the fifth, and then Johny started to scream from the pain...all I could think was _he's doing it! He's ******* doing it!_ Ruthless Robbie Lawler is a UFC champion because he earned it.

Come on guys, you can't win a fight by resting your head on someone's balls. I mean that makes you something all right, but it doesn't make you a winner.

This makes up for all the times I've got my heart broken by MMA. This makes up for a shitty 2014. This makes up for a lot of things. I'm so ******* happy right now.


----------



## King Daisuke (Mar 25, 2013)

One last thing: Fu:angry07:ck you Joe Rogan, you biased asshole!


----------



## RangerClydeTheBlue (Jul 11, 2012)

Yeah when Rogan said "Robbie needs a knockout" I was thinking "How? He's most likely 2-1 down"


----------



## Joabbuac (Jan 31, 2009)

Why is Rogan a "biased asshole" for disagreeing with your score? Thats just how he saw it live...


----------



## Iuanes (Feb 17, 2009)

Watching it again, it was a really strange fight.

Robbie was so calm at to the point of inactivity at times. Hendricks going for take downs and just chillin' out. He seemed more tired than Robbie.

I wanted Robbie to win and if I were the judge I would give it to him based on the 5th round and the man stare at the end alone.

But, I'm not, and I can't see how he won the fight based on round by round scoring.

I don't think judges give two shits about leg kicks, and some judges interpret 'effective grappling' also as defensive grappling which I think is allowable due to the wording of the rules.

Whatever, we'll probably see a third sometime.


----------



## Iuanes (Feb 17, 2009)

double post


----------



## Oax (Nov 23, 2014)

Got to watch the fight again and man what an odd fight. I re-scored the first round for Lawler since Hendricks really didn't do anything, but I'm used to scoring control over damage after years of being improperly conditioned. Hendricks said it best after the fight "I didn't fight like a champion in the championship rounds". This is the second time he's pulled an Oscar De La Hoya.



:thumbsup:


----------



## King Daisuke (Mar 25, 2013)

Joabbuac said:


> Why is Rogan a "biased asshole" for disagreeing with your score? Thats just how he saw it live...


Joe's a biased asshole because during BOTH fights he was going crazy for every little single thing Hendricks was doing, and when Robbie's throwing bombs in return he only made robotic comments like "strikes by Robbie". He came into both fights with pre-though commentary and Hendricks was winning no matter what actually was happening.

For example:

(from the first fight)

*Robbie is hitting Hendricks in the face, Joe doesn't say a word*
*Hendricks throws a combination in return*

Goldie: Good strikes by Hendricks.
Joe: (cuts Goldie off) EXCELLENT STRIKES BY HENDRICKS!!!!!


----------



## BrutalKO (Oct 5, 2006)

...I think Robbie stuffing the takedowns and that huge flurry at the end certainly contributed to Lawler's victory. Fair enough. I'm happy with the decision. It was a tough grind with Robbie getting the edge...


----------



## sucrets (Jul 8, 2007)

The facts:

1. Rounds 2 and 3 definitely go to Johnny
2. Round 5 definitely goes to Robbie (perhaps a 10-8?)
3. Round 1 and 4 were both very close and could have been scored either way although I thought Johnny won round 4

My only grief with this fight is that Robbie didn't do what he did in the last minute in the other rounds, minus the first 45 seconds or round 1. It would have been fantastic had he done that more in the fight.


Personally, I wanted Robbie to win but thought that Johnny barely edged it. It don't think there was a robbery though. Just a very close fight.


----------



## RangerClydeTheBlue (Jul 11, 2012)

^All of this. Robbie was fuking infuriating in this fight.


----------



## loci (Jun 2, 2007)

I'm fookin delighted that fight avoiding leg humper didn't con the judges again. :thumb02:


----------



## DeeJay (Dec 5, 2014)

Initially I was surprised by the judges cards. I'd scored it 48-47 Hendricks. So I immediately rewatched it and payed attention to more judging criteria than a fans perspective. I scored it 48-47 Lawler that time, and could see why possibly one judge scored it 49-46 Lawler. The only clear round in my eyes for Hendricks after 2 views of the fight was round 3.

Really though, Robbie seemed so reluctant to strike, and didnt really seem to get out of third gear. Surprised that he managed to take the belt. Hope to see Lawler/Hendricks 3 whilst Rory beats 1 more contender to be number 1.


----------



## Life B Ez (Jan 23, 2010)

It's really weird to me that take downs change so much for people from fight to fight. When say a guy like Phil Davis or ryan Bader wrestle ****s someone but they get stuffed a lot and win it's "OH WHAT THE HELL ROBBERY THE OTHER GUY STOPPED MOST OF HIS TAKE DOWNS AND LANDED STRIKES HE WON TDD IS OCTAGON CONTROL!!!!" But then there's a fight like this and the reverse is true. Oh he got the take downs and control.

I'm not really commenting on who I thought won or lost just an observation of reaction.


----------



## Woodenhead (Jan 5, 2010)

I found the fight to be largely boring, outside of Lawler's amazing bursts of output at the beginning and end of the fight. Hendricks looked to be stalling the majority of the fight (just grabbing hold / TD then doing absolutely nothing with it) and I was confused by Lawler's apparent gun-shy-ness during the middle rounds. So then I'm left with Hendrick's leg kicks and Lawler's occasional counterstrikes. IDK, felt like a very weird fight to score. Going by past judging results, I figured JH won, but if I was to score it based on my gut, I'd score it a draw at worst. lol that's all just my opinion.

In the end, the whiney idiot lost, so all is right in the world.

[edit] Looking at the judging rules on the UFC site, I'm guessing they simply didn't see JH's grappling as being effective; rather they saw it for what it was - stalling, failing to convert TDs, desperation, what have you - therefore scoring defensive points for RL?


----------



## Life B Ez (Jan 23, 2010)

I laughed really hard at this.


----------



## bdd10813 (Oct 5, 2014)

I didn't want to say anything else about this fight until I had some sleep and let the fight calm down so I wouldn't be scoring off of emotion to see if my first score is the same as my second score. And this is why I'm not a judge. Me scoring live events especially events that I'm invested in, its very hard to score it right the first time because I'm a fan. Judges are not MMA fans and I'm glad they are not cause that does affect how you look at a fight. With the current 10 Point Must System, either man could of won the fight. Just going off of my Minute/Minute System just looking at who won the round, not the actual point score I had Hendricks winning round 2 and 3. Lawler winning rounds 1 and 5. Round 4 was a draw so with the 10 point must system, someone has to win that round. The moments where Hendricks had Lawler against the cage I scored that the same way I would score if he was on the ground. By damage. The moments Hendricks had Lawler on the cage and was doing damage while Lawler was trying to defend the takedown I scored in Hendricks favor. The moments when Hendricks had Lawler on the cage just controlling but Lawler was attacking even if its a elbow here or there, a knee here or there, I scored in Lawler's favor. The moments where there was nothing from either on the cage, I scored in Hendricks favor because just as on the ground, if he is just riding you and your not doing anything to get up or attack, advantage goes to Hendricks. So with the Ten Point Must system, I score it 48-48 Draw but ofcourse with the Ten Point Must System, it cant be a draw so Round 4 is up for debate. But with my Minute/Minute System I scored it Hendricks 239 Lawler 236. Hendricks Wins. Here is my Scorecard.


Hendricks Lawler
R1)9,9,9,10,10= 47 10,10,10,9,9= (48)
R2)9,10,10,9,10= (48) 10,9,9,10,9= 47
R3)10,10,10,10,10= (50) 9,9,9,9,9= 45
R4) 10,10,9,10,9= (48) 9,9,10,10,10= (48)
R5)10,10,9,9,8= 46 9,9,10,10,10= (48)

Total= Hendricks(239) Lawler 236

Min/Min System- Hendricks Wins
Official Jud.- 48-47Law, 48-47Hen, 49-46Law

The only judge in question is the third judge which I would like to see just how he thought the second round went to Lawler cause it makes no sense. With the 10 Point Must System, the fight is very close. With the Min/Min system, the fight was close but clear who won. Hendricks should of won the fight, but with the current system it works in Robbie's favor this fight.﻿

To learn about my Minute/Minute System, visit http://www.mmafighting.com/2014/10/4/6908299/mma-scoring-system-needs-a-change﻿


----------



## UFC_OWNS (Jul 7, 2010)

amoosenamedhank said:


> People have told you multiple times why they think Lawler won the fight but you're just discrediting their opinion by calling it fanboi opinionated nonsense. So why should anyone else waste their time trying to accept your open challenge to explain how Lawler won if you've already shown you're just going to immediately dismiss their opinion and call them a follower.
> 
> I'm actually shocked at how many people are agreeing with this decision. I was laughing with a buddy right before I signed on here about how this forum was most likely burning itself down as cries for robbery have been popular in the past.
> 
> As I mentioned before, I think this decision was good for the sport and I think if wrestlers know the fights will be scored like this, it can only improve the quality of fights.


Uhh no you got what I said completely wrong and furthermore it's hardly good for the sport if the judges consistently change the way they judge fights and then revert back in the next one.


----------



## Anteries (Oct 22, 2010)

Life B Ez said:


> I laughed really hard at this.


that's a fantastic photo.

Good comments on this thread. Great result, Cinderella stuff. I like the way Robbie Lawler carries himself,great warrior, you can keep fancy pants McGregor.

I agree with what a lot of people have said, Rogan was definitely biased. Robbie lawyer one fairly and squarely in my view. I don't remember Johnny doing any damage in any of his takedowns or attempted takedowns During the fight. No elbows or ground and pound. So his work was cage control which is pretty low down in the scale of things compared to aggression and forward motion. I think that holding up against the fence is old-fashioned, and doesn't cut it with the judges all UFC for that matter. Although the judges are independent I'm sure they want people to enjoy themselves, and I don't think they find it welcome during a pay-per-view world championship for one fighter to be stalling through fear of strikes, in fact it could go the other way and go against the wrestler. One thing that amazes me is Rogan's hyperbolic talk about leg kicks. Anyone who's ever been in a fight will know that when the adrenaline is flowing you don't feel pain so much. I don't think they are is damaging on the whole as the commentators suggest.


----------



## RangerClydeTheBlue (Jul 11, 2012)

People saying all Hendricks did was grab Lawler are a bit unfair. Those combos in the 2nd and 3rd were awesome. Only really the end of the 4th and the entire 5th was be boring.


----------



## Joabbuac (Jan 31, 2009)

Lawler's whole attitude was really different in this fight... as well as his plan to come on strong rather than fade. In the first he was laughing and joking around.. the smile never left his face until the last round when he faded. 

This time he was deadly serious, and the super fast start only to then pull back and pace him self was pretty intelligent... gave him that extra energy to nearly finish Hendricks at the end.


----------



## Bonnar426 (Jul 18, 2006)

For once I liked to get through a pay per view without the masses screaming controversial decision. I guess that is impossible as finding a good episode of Star Trek: Enterprise.

Anyways, its good to see Robbie finally getting his hands on UFC gold.


----------



## Stun Gun (Oct 24, 2012)

ClydebankBlitz said:


> People saying all Hendricks did was grab Lawler are a bit unfair. Those combos in the 2nd and 3rd were awesome. Only really the end of the 4th and the entire 5th was be boring.


I agree with you here. Hendricks did have a lot of nice combos in this fight. But when he grappled he didn't really do anything.


----------



## Woodenhead (Jan 5, 2010)

Yeah, I only say that as a generalisation & overall personal opinion on the fight as a whole. Forest vs. trees and all that.


----------



## RangerClydeTheBlue (Jul 11, 2012)

Mark Bocek:-

"Don't take your opponent down kids... Lmfao!!! #robbery"


And you guys said I should actually listen to this douche talk about fighter pay?


----------



## Term (Jul 28, 2009)

UFC_OWNS said:


> Uhh no you got what I said completely wrong and furthermore it's hardly good for the sport if the judges consistently change the way they judge fights and then revert back in the next one.



I don't know, if you are never sure which way the judges are going to go it might give the fighters more urgency to try and finish and not go to a decision.


----------



## StandThemUp (May 30, 2008)

To me it seemed like the judges not only didn't give any credit for Hendrixs just sticking his head in Lawler's crotch over and over with no positive result. But they also at the same time gave credit to Lawler for landing elbows and strikes while Hendrix's tried to hide his head under Robbie's ball sack to avoid fighting.

(At one point Johhny's corner yelled "Hide your head". and I'm like, yeah, if you just stick it inside Lawlers ass it will be totally safe. You're almost there") Or Pull it out and actually fight.

Finally a fighter gets rewarded for fighting and a wrestler get's nothing for wresting in a FIGHTING Championship.
Clearly the judges favored actual fighting over wrestling (Which isn't fighting). It's about time.

If I heard the ref say "Let's work" one more time to Hendrixs I was gonna lose it. I was like, he is not working or fighting, he is trying to kill the clock. They should start issuing yellow than red cards for non-fighting. You shouldn't win or keep a belt by trying to avoid fighting and trying to stall and kill the clock (which Johnny was clearly doing). You should have to fight for it. hopefully judgeing has finally caught up to this reality.

Now I admit, Johny wasn't stalling and trying to kill the clock ALL the time. But he clearly did it enough for the judges to be like 'Yeah, I don't think so". In contrast, Robbie was always trying to fight, even when against the cage, he was dropping elbows and punches to keep busy. While Johny just threw an occasional knee when he heard the ref say 'Keep Busy".

Lawler - Rounds 1, 4 and 5


----------



## UFC_OWNS (Jul 7, 2010)

Term said:


> I don't know, if you are never sure which way the judges are going to go it might give the fighters more urgency to try and finish and not go to a decision.


Well that's been the theory for a long time yet it really doesn't change anything, fighters still fight the way they do.


----------



## Life B Ez (Jan 23, 2010)

UFC_OWNS said:


> Well that's been the theory for a long time yet it really doesn't change anything, fighters still fight the way they do.


Whenever I hear a corner saying "just avoid the (insert whatever the guy is good at) you're up." I always cringe.


----------



## UFC_OWNS (Jul 7, 2010)

Life B Ez said:


> Whenever I hear a corner saying "just avoid the (insert whatever the guy is good at) you're up." I always cringe.


Word if I ever get to corner someone, i'm never telling anyone they're up i'm telling them to finish the fight every round.


----------



## MK. (Dec 16, 2012)

ClydebankBlitz said:


> People saying all Hendricks did was grab Lawler are a bit unfair. Those combos in the 2nd and 3rd were awesome. Only really the end of the 4th and the entire 5th was be boring.


This, the 1-2 punches then the inside/outside leg kicks were awesome. He was destroying Robbie with them.

I scored it first 3 rounds for Hendicks and the last 2 for Robbie. But i understand why the judges gave it to Robbie, because it was clear that if the last round would have lasted another 10-15 seconds Hendricks would have been knock out.

Hope they don't make the trilogy right now, it would be boring.


----------



## hadoq (Jan 6, 2011)

This fight, to me, is saying that the judging has gotten better. They don't fall for the "lay and pray" anymore, not as much as they did before.

Hendricks tried to coast, but was never that. 
GSP was accused of LnP but he was always active, either on the ground or grappling in general.

I was so glad when Lawler got his hands raised. it felt that hendricks wasn't even that aggressive, trying to wrestlef**k a decision.

Robbie got robbed the first time around, but to me he clearly won rounds 1 4 and 5. I take it 1st round body shots paid off cause hendricks looked like he didn't want to be there anymore after 3 and a half rounds


----------



## Killz (Oct 5, 2009)

Wow, Just Wow! Robbie ******* Lawler!!

I've watched this fight 3 times and man, Rogan could not have been further up Hendricks' ass if he tried, it was pretty embarrassing to be honest.

I scored it 48-47 Lawler, but that first round was pretty close. It depends whether you score Lawlers kicks and pressing pace over Jonny's takedowns and clinch on who won the round. Personally, I gave it to Robbie. 

Round 2 and 3 also close but I gave them both to Hendricks. He was really doing a number with those combos and I think when he fights like that he is at his best. 

Rounds 4 and 5 I gave clearly to Robbie. He controlled the pace and also pressed the action. He also landed the much more significant shots, finishing both rounds beating on Hendricks.

I feel like this fight should act as a warning to those fighters who fight 'not to lose' as opposed to 'fighting to win'. Jonny Hendricks quite clearly was fighting 'not to lose' here. That holding onto a single or double whilst making no effort to complete the takedown or transition to something else was what cost him here.

This isn't GSP laying on someone for 5 rounds, at least GSP controlled his guys and for the most part put a beating on them. How many times was GSP ever stood up for stalling? Jonny Hendricks was seperated at least 3 times in this fight just for doing nothing. He doesnt deserve the belt fighting like that and I hope they don't make the rematch.


----------



## Swp (Jan 2, 2010)

Killz said:


> Wow, Just Wow! Robbie ******* Lawler!!
> 
> I've watched this fight 3 times and man, Rogan could not have been further up Hendricks' ass if he tried, it was pretty embarrassing to be honest.
> 
> ...


THIS !!
hahaha You're right !!!!.. I did the same thing , I've watched the fight without sound ... had it the the same !!

And yea Johnny fought like a ***** , and cost him.. thats not how a champion fights ... GSP was implementing his wrestling , he was always working , moving , changing position,punching, not just holding ...


----------



## RangerClydeTheBlue (Jul 11, 2012)

Interesting things about Glenn Trowbridge, the judge who gave Robbie round 2.

He scored the 3rd Pacquiao Vs JMM fight to Pacquiao by 4 rounds. = BAD

He scored Natal over Camozzi. = BAD

He scored GSP over Hendricks. He scored Rory Mac over Lawler. = NO BIAS.


----------



## Joabbuac (Jan 31, 2009)

ClydebankBlitz said:


> Interesting things about Glenn Trowbridge, the judge who gave Robbie round 2.
> 
> He scored the 3rd Pacquiao Vs JMM fight to Pacquiao by 4 rounds. = BAD
> 
> ...



So not biased... just totally incompetent, nice.


----------



## Swp (Jan 2, 2010)




----------



## Killz (Oct 5, 2009)

:laugh: 

hahahahahaha


----------



## ReptilianSlayer (Sep 2, 2013)

Diaz beats them both.


----------



## Killz (Oct 5, 2009)

ReptilianSlayer said:


> Diaz beats them both.


Oh behave :laugh:


----------



## Joabbuac (Jan 31, 2009)

Diaz would batter Lawler into submisson.


----------



## oldfan (Mar 14, 2010)

That was a close fight. If I was a hendricks fan I'd be pissed. Glad I'm not 

This pic gave me warm fuzzies. MFS


----------



## RangerClydeTheBlue (Jul 11, 2012)

My thoughts on Diaz would be:-

Hendricks wrestle****s Diaz for 5 rounds.
Diaz stops Lawler with punches.


----------



## oldfan (Mar 14, 2010)

I'd love to see robbie rematch Diaz but by the time he unretires from the beating Silva puts on him it'll be moot. Who knows who'll be champ by then.


----------



## Killz (Oct 5, 2009)

oldfan said:


> I'd love to see robbie rematch Diaz but by the time he unretires from the beating Silva puts on him it'll be moot. Who knows who'll be champ by then.


Rory Macdonald... that's who :thumb02:


----------



## UFC_OWNS (Jul 7, 2010)

Rory will never win the belt, unless they open a norman bates division.


----------



## oldfan (Mar 14, 2010)

Killz said:


> Rory Macdonald... that's who :thumb02:


:laugh: you so silly


----------



## Atilak (Nov 24, 2009)

I want to put my opinion on result of this fight.
Disclaimer: I had money bet on Lawler!!!

When I was watching fight live for first time. I was 100% sure that Hendricks won. I was mad that Lawler started fighting 30sec before end and not sooner.
My mind was blown when they anounced result. I didnt even thought that it was close.

I read this whole thread and watched fight muted. Counting stuff, writing on paper.
I had Hendricks won 1,2,3,4 round. 

I think what people are missing, mainly in 4th round, that for first almost 3 min Hendricks has something like 10 unaswered combinations and always landed something. Yes at the end of round Robbie did somthing but man. You need to look at rounds as whole.

Same first round. Robbie did good first minute, but since than Johny took control of that round. Even scored a td.

I hade couple of MMA fights myself and watching all UFC events. I think that I know what I see. And the one judge 49-46 should be fired.


----------



## amoosenamedhank (Sep 2, 2009)

UFC_OWNS said:


> Uhh no you got what I said completely wrong and furthermore it's hardly good for the sport if the judges consistently change the way they judge fights and then revert back in the next one.


I didn't say it was good for the judges to consistently change back and forth... I said this particular style of judging would drastically change the way wrestlers fight, thus hopefully creating less 'wet blanket' fights; if this ideology was to be implemented going forward.


----------



## slapshot (May 4, 2007)

oldfan said:


> That was a close fight. If I was a hendricks fan I'd be pissed. Glad I'm not
> 
> This pic gave me warm fuzzies. MFS


Looks like Robbie would rather not take that pic.


----------



## Voiceless (Nov 8, 2010)

aerius said:


> Who knew that Hendricks would turn into Jon Fitch?


After all the whining Hendricks he put on the mic after the St. Pierre fight and the bearing he took in the first Lawler fight, I saw it coming that once having the belt he'd go the "fight not to lose"-wrestle f*ck route.




Life B Ez said:


> The worst part of this is the massive amount of bitching and whining Hendricks is going to do.


Is there any word out from him yet¿ What did he say in the post-fight presser¿ (I haven't seen it yet)



amoosenamedhank said:


> I can't even begin to explain how happy I am with this decision. I'm so sick of 'wall n stall' being counted as control.
> 
> Johny lost to GSP because he coasted in the 5th and now he lost this fight because he spent so much time stalling.
> 
> Hendricks seems to have a low fight IQ


Or he just doesn't have a fighter mentallity.



slapshot said:


> I was surprised Lawler had big headkicks, he's defiantly diversified his game.


I remember him throwing head kicks in earlier fights. He even won the Volker fight by head kick. I can't remember him throwing low kicks and kicks to the body though.



Killz said:


> Wow, Just Wow! Robbie ******* Lawler!!
> 
> I've watched this fight 3 times and man, Rogan could not have been further up Hendricks' ass if he tried, it was pretty embarrassing to be honest.
> 
> ...


Hopefully they will start to judge in favor of fighters instead of trying-not-to-losers.

I had it 1 & 5 for Lawler, thinking the TD at the end of the round might have typically stolen it for Hendricks in the judges eyes.

4 very close

2 & 3 Hendricks

In the end I gave it to Lawler as I'm favoring fighters, but thought that the judges would probably give it to the wrestle-f*ucker as usual.


----------



## amoosenamedhank (Sep 2, 2009)

Voiceless said:


> Is there any word out from him yet¿ What did he say in the post-fight presser¿ (I haven't seen it yet)


He owned up to it pretty well in the post fight conference... but we'll see what he has to say in the next couple of weeks. He said he didn't come out and fight like a champ in the champion rounds.

He said he's not sure why he held the TD attempts so long instead of continuing in the striking game which was winning him the fight.

One very interesting point that I don't think anyone has mentioned yet is he basically admitted to coasting in the 5th round.

He said that he was fairly certain he had won the first 3 rounds and when asked if Robbie finishing the last round so strong was the reason Robbie was giving the decision, he responded with "I wasn't going to get into a slug fest with the guy and risk getting knocked out. I thought I had the rounds at that point and it's a numbers game; and this time I lost."

So he basically admitted that he thought he had the rounds to win, thus didn't feel the need to take any risk to finish the fight strong. 

This is exactly what he did in the GSP fight and now what he did here.

I think you're right, he just doesn't have the heart of a champ. He doesn't have that burning desire to fight.

I think he's a good wrestler and had some fun knockin' some people the fcuk out.... but I just don't think he's got that absolutely never stop drive in him.

Another fun fact... Johny carries this reputation as a KO artist... and while the has KO power, he's more so a decision machine. 

If you look at his UFC record... he has had 14 fights. 5 of those fights were won by (T)KO and the rest by decision (9). 4 of those 9 decisions were by split and 2 of them (vs Condit and Lawler 1) were pretty damn close. 

This guy and his camp should know better by now. He shouldn't ever be taking his foot off the pedal because he thinks he's won the fight. He's been involved in way to many close fights to be that stupid and get away with it.


----------



## Voiceless (Nov 8, 2010)

amoosenamedhank said:


> He owned up to it pretty well in the post fight conference... but we'll see what he has to say in the next couple of weeks. He said he didn't come out and fight like a champ in the champion rounds.


Haha, that really must have been a beating at the end of the 5th round he has taken from Lawler that he is so admitting.



amoosenamedhank said:


> One very interesting point that I don't think anyone has mentioned yet is he basically admitted to coasting in the 5th round.
> 
> He said that he was fairly certain he had won the first 3 rounds and when asked if Robbie finishing the last round so strong was the reason Robbie was giving the decision, he responded with "I wasn't going to get into a slug fest with the guy and risk getting knocked out. I thought I had the rounds at that point and it's a numbers game; and this time I lost."
> 
> So he basically admitted that he thought he had the rounds to win, thus didn't feel the need to take any risk to finish the fight strong.


Man that's ugly.




> This is exactly what he did in the GSP fight and now what he did here.
> 
> I think you're right, he just doesn't have the heart of a champ. He doesn't have that burning desire to fight.
> 
> ...



Probably that's part of why he fights like he fights. He got away with his wrestle f*ck coasting way too often.

You can say what you want about St. Pierre and him not finishing fights, but he tried to make sure to win every single round of his fights. He never coasted.

While Hendricks was whining and bitching around after losing to St. Pierre, Lawler, after putting a beating on Hendricks and still losing, without hesitation just took the next two fights the instant they were offered to him to eventually claim the title via fighting. There is certainly a difference in attitude there.


----------



## amoosenamedhank (Sep 2, 2009)

Voiceless said:


> Man that's ugly.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


And that's why no one seems to bent out of shape about this decision... it's sort of the world righting itself.


----------



## slapshot (May 4, 2007)

Toxic said:


> I didn't give Lawler the round but I am guessing they were scoring octagon control for Lawler. The rules are kinda vague on octagon control on how to score it when a fighter is failing to secure the td but his opponent is unable to get off the fence. Usually you see it scored for the guy who keeps his opponent on the fence but I think because Hendricks was keeping his head down between Lawlers legs that he was clearly and constantly going for the td and that Robbie was defending that and therefore dictating where the fight took place. That is at least the best explanation I can come up with for giving Lawler a 3rd round.
> 
> 
> Sent from Verticalsports.com App


I feel the rules are clear but how the officials apply them is a mess, stuffing td's is control, at least thats what the rules say.


----------



## Toxic (Mar 1, 2007)

slapshot said:


> I feel the rules are clear but how the officials apply them is a mess, stuffing td's is control, at least thats what the rules say.



The act of stuffing the td is control but what is the act of pinning somebody to the cage for 3 minutes?


Sent from Verticalsports.com App


----------



## TanyaJade (Aug 31, 2010)

I honestly turned the fight off after round three because I thought it was going to be more of the same.
I was super shocked when I heard Lawler won the fight and when i rewatched it I thought Lawler won 1-4-5. I think the WW title will be a revolving door much like the LHW title was until Jones came around. MacDonald, while I'm not a fan in the slightest, will beat Lawler in my opinion but I expect him to be a Ben Henderson kind of champion.

Really my interest in MMA has been waning heavily these last few weeks.
I had no idea that JDS and Miocic were fighting next week, if that tells you anything. This might put a jolt of interest in me now.


----------



## slapshot (May 4, 2007)

Toxic said:


> The act of stuffing the td is control but what is the act of pinning somebody to the cage for 3 minutes?
> 
> 
> Sent from Verticalsports.com App


Its not considered a dominant position if he's working for a positional change and cant get it. 

Think of it this way, his intent was not to hold Robbie on the fence but to take him down. Maybe if he had actually been attempting to do damage or hold Robbie on the fence in-able to do damage then you have a case for control but clearly position changes are not granted any significance per the rules nor are attempts.


----------



## AmdM (Apr 13, 2010)

TanyaJade said:


> MacDonald, while I'm not a fan in the slightest, will beat Lawler in my opinion but I expect him to be a Ben Henderson kind of champion.


Lawler and Macdonald already fought like one year ago!


----------



## TanyaJade (Aug 31, 2010)

AmdM said:


> Lawler and Macdonald already fought like one year ago!


I know, and I thought Lawler won that fight but Rory has evolved. I think he had what it takes to beat him but again this is just an opinion. I'd root for Lawler regardless.


----------



## John8204 (May 13, 2010)

AmdM said:


> Lawler and Macdonald already fought like one year ago!


Yeah and it was split decision...Rory was coming back in that fight and he's been waiting 2-3 years for his title shot.

At this point you have a lot of rematches that make sense right now.

Lawler/Macdonald II
Condit/Diaz II
GSP/Hendricks II
Lombard/Brown
Woodley/Gastelum

Which might lead to Condit/GSP II, Diaz/GSP II, Hendricks/Lawler III, Woodley/Condit II, Macdonald/Condit II, Condit/Hendricks II


----------



## slapshot (May 4, 2007)

MacDonald's got jack shit for Lawler..


----------



## Toxic (Mar 1, 2007)

slapshot said:


> MacDonald's got jack shit for Lawler..



I think MacDonald has a ton for Lawler and give him a handful but he can't show Lawler the respect he did in the first fight. The first fight he fought to not get knocked out and offered little in the way of offense. 


Sent from Verticalsports.com App


----------



## John8204 (May 13, 2010)

Toxic said:


> I think MacDonald has a ton for Lawler and give him a handful but he can't show Lawler the respect he did in the first fight. The first fight he fought to not get knocked out and offered little in the way of offense.


I think Lawler tagged him in the first and it took a while for Rory to get his wits about him. I think with another two rounds he wins that fight handily.


----------



## King Daisuke (Mar 25, 2013)




----------



## King Daisuke (Mar 25, 2013)

John8204 said:


> ...Rory was coming back in that fight


Rory was coming back and then Robbie knocked him back down.


----------



## RangerClydeTheBlue (Jul 11, 2012)

Rory's fight against Woodley defo makes me think he has a shot against Lawler. I love Lawler cause he's defo a beatable champ and thats exciting, especially since I'm a big fan of his.


----------



## Joabbuac (Jan 31, 2009)

King Daisuke said:


>


I love how he stare at Hendricks... stares at him so hard he takes a knee.


----------



## Gustafsson Fan (Apr 3, 2012)

When both got tired one could see that Hendricks standup defence is weak. He stands with head in the center and is too easy to hit.

I am glad that Lawler won that fight because hanging on to opponent in clinch is boring to watch.


----------



## King Daisuke (Mar 25, 2013)

Joabbuac said:


> I love how he stare at Hendricks... stares at him so hard he takes a knee.


That's the alpha dog showing a puppy his place right there.


----------



## Voiceless (Nov 8, 2010)

Joabbuac said:


> I love how he stare at Hendricks... stares at him so hard he takes a knee.


There you can see who has won that fight and who did not.


----------



## Joabbuac (Jan 31, 2009)

Yea... one guy walking away, shaking his head... and taking a knee = winner?

Love this picture too...


----------



## King Daisuke (Mar 25, 2013)

There was no amount of leg humping that could have stopped this from happening. I'm still pumped!


----------



## Voiceless (Nov 8, 2010)

Does anyone know whether Hendricks just left the cage after the announcement or why was there no post fight interview with him¿


----------



## Term (Jul 28, 2009)

King Daisuke said:


>


That is awesome to see.


----------



## Danm2501 (Jun 22, 2009)

So happy that Lawler won the belt. The greatest turnaround in fortunes in MMA history. Everyone thought Lawler was done. If you'd said in 2010-2011 that in 4 years Lawler would be UFC champion, you'd have been ridiculed. Such an amazing transformation, and I'm so happy for Robbie. Hope he keeps the belt for a while!


----------



## Woodenhead (Jan 5, 2010)

King Daisuke said:


> *Sam & Dave - Hold On, I'm Comin'*


I have to spread rep around, but just had to say something. :thumb02:


----------



## King Daisuke (Mar 25, 2013)

Voiceless said:


> Does anyone know whether Hendricks just left the cage after the announcement or why was there no post fight interview with him¿


They left.



Term said:


> That is awesome to see.


It is!



Danm2501 said:


> So happy that Lawler won the belt. The greatest turnaround in fortunes in MMA history. Everyone thought Lawler was done. If you'd said in 2010-2011 that in 4 years Lawler would be UFC champion, you'd have been ridiculed. Such an amazing transformation, and I'm so happy for Robbie. Hope he keeps the belt for a while!


Me too!



Woodenhead said:


> I have to spread rep around, but just had to say something. :thumb02:


It was just so goddamn fitting after the year Robbie's had. I can't believe anyone hasn't used that song before.


----------

