He also controlled him on the cage. It wasn't a OMG robbery, but I thought under MMA judging criteria it was a sure win for Lawlor or at the very least a draw. BTW I am not a Lawlor fight fan (he's funny but thats about it) so this isn't coming from a biased point of view.
It wasn't the worst I've ever seen, but I was very shocked when that happened. I'm not a fan of either, but it annoys me when judges don't make any sense.
My second favourite part of MMAF.
People whining about decisions while using logic that would suggest that fights aren't scored on a round by round scoring system.
OMG HE GOT MORE TAKEDOWNS HE SHUOLD WIN.
No, actually he only got takedowns in round 2. Which he clearly won. He actually got taken down in round 3 and failed all his other attempts.
I love it, people love to whine about judges yet articulate themselves in a way that makes it evident they'd be incompetent ones.
Uhm, I understand that the scoring system is round by round... In the first round, Lawlor landed more punches (as opposed to a big kick to the forearms), controlled the fight against the cage, and had a semi-decent guillotine attempt. On the virtue of activity, that puts him ahead.
Round two, we don't even need to talk about.
Round 3, Lawlor lands a lot more strikes unless you think forearms should be a scoring target. Neither fighter lands a takedown. They fell down for a second then popped back up. That don't count, y0!
EDIT: I'd actually probably make a great judge, since I've actually competed in MMA, boxing, kickboxing, and grappling. I actually know what's going on in there, which is more than Cecil Peoples can say.
Originally Posted by TheLyotoLegion
*looks at sig*
*Understands how you could score the fight for Pearson even though Barboza dropped him*
Actually, this goes back to something roflcopter said about fights being scored round by round... Dropping someone once but getting completely outscored otherwise, and in two other rounds, doesn't get you a win. Unless you're a hometown favorite, apparently.