I had rounds 1 and 2 for Bisping and 3rd for Chael but I'm not surprised by the result.
Reality is that it was a close fight.
My problem is that I think that the criteria for judging a fight needs to change. Octagon control and having a dominant position in the first two rounds that Chael had really meant nothing to me. Bisping clearly did more damage in the fight and he was able to get to his feet multiple times without sustaining any damage and at the same time dolling it out.
In the third round Chael used his wrestling more effectively and landed many shots, but none of them were devastating. That being said Bisping was unable to stop him and didn't do any damage in return.
I had this fight as Bisping winning, and at the very least a draw, but that is based on my criteria for scoring a fight which is much different then those outlined for the judges to follow.
Judges have a tough job and are going to be criticized no matter what, but I think the criteria for scoring fights should be based more on potential fight ending moves and damage a fighter deals out than dominant position and octagon control.
Always Supporting Fighters That Fight to Finish or be Finished
Last edited by Ryan1522; 01-29-2012 at 04:03 PM.