Dana said Condit v Hendricks is #1 contender bout? I dont think so.
The pre-fight press-conference was dominated by Diaz and his shenanigans, but the one question that wasn't about GSP-Diaz (and was overlooked) was posed to Dana - a reporter asked him whether Hendricks would get the shot if he won, and Dana answered "The winner of the fight is #1 Contender". Here are the issues I have with this:
1) Condit just lost to GSP in a pretty convincing manner. Of course, the Zuffa hype machine can edit that one mini-comeback to make it look like it was a back-and-forth fight, but for anyone who actually saw it, you'll remember that GSP was in trouble for all of one minute, and then got back to dominating Condit everywhere, including in the stand-up. What I'm saying is if Condit and GSP both win, no one wants to see the rematch, but its still marketable.
2) Condit just fought Diaz in one of the most controversial title fights in recent history. No promises of "dogfights", or overdubbed "where you at Carlos" montages are going to convince the discerning fan that a rematch would be any different.
3) If Diaz wins, a GSP-Diaz rematch is more marketable than Diaz-Hendricks, and Hendricks (even if he wins), will either have to sit on the shelf for another 6 months to a year, or fight Ellenberger-Marquardt winner, or Rory/Maia/whomsoever to stay busy.
4) If Diaz gives GSP a close fight (a la Frankie Edgar), a rematch is again very marketable, much more so than GSP-Hendricks.
Therefore, thinking Dana's (possibly empty) words through, you can make the argument that Hendricks-Condit is a one-way contender match (meaning only for Hendricks), and that Hendricks will only get his title shot if GSP convincingly beats Diaz.
Supporting UFC heels since 2009