It doesn't matter because it was settled. BJ got his immediate rematch and Edgar won convincingly. He showed he is the better fighter. It's not like that's how Edgar ran off with the belt and now we will never know.
1st fight controversial? Fine.
2nd fight? Edgar showed everyone who the champ was.
EDIT: We are getting off topic here. Back to the subject at hand.
Sent from my iPhone using Verticalsports.com App
I agree that Frankie convincingly winning the 2nd fight does take away some of the sting. Not all of it since the 1st fight on it's own was still scored incorrectly IMO.
But it helps when the guy who got the controversial decision wins convincingly. Makes a little more complicated in situations like Shogun-Machida where the guy that "lost" got the convincing win.
Makes it even more messed up when I get a situation like Frankie-Bendo. IMO Frankie clearly lost a non controversial decision and did not deserve a rematch. However I felt he won the rematch in a much closer fight. So he won a fight he didn't deserve? How do I process that? LOL OK, I'll drop that topic for now. Sorry for going on. Forgive me for the annoyance.