Cant agree there Mr drunk. I broke down that fight on a microscopic level, and FM were wrong.
I stated in my breakdown that I thought Shogun technically won, but understood how rounds 1 to 3 could be given to Lyoto. He did some very cool shit in those rounds whereas Shoguns methods were more crude and very effective. Easy to see how the judges could be affected more by fancy moves : quality over quantity. I'm not saying anything other than, I can "understand" how that fight could have gone to either fighter. It was not a robbery.
Fightmetric often get their numbers completely wrong. I'm not making it up. They allow personal bias to skew thier scores. Ive seen it enough times to completely discredit them.
Same. I've watched the first two rounds well over 10 times, the first time when I watched it live was the closet I ever got to giving them to machida. I still gave 1 and 2 to shogun, although it was close.. However after re-watching shogun by a fair margin won both the first two rounds.
They may have in the past, the only rounds I really broke down second by second were the first two. I assumed or didn't care about the next three because most people easily gave the 4th and 5th rounds to shogun. Since they got the first two right I didn't really follow up on the rest.
But really what I would like to know is how you can give the first two rounds to machida? Up front its possible by obvious mistake, but it becomes apparent both rounds clearly were won by shogun. What did machida do better than shogun? Point wise how could he have won either of the first two rounds? Something I have yet to understand what so ever.
What gets me about this decision is that it was almost entirely a striking match, I could much easier understand the "bisping hammill" decision as compared to this.
Edit: I just got back from google. Apparently many people have challenged fightmetrics and their scoring. None have discredited them with any facts, and in fact many people believe it to be the most accurate not-biased information about the fights they cover. Since by your accounts they are "discredited" could you please show me why you think so and any evidence or fact on the subject since others have failed in that department?