Quake3World

LawL wrote:I rubber you're glue

I said the judging was skewed. I didn't use it validate a point. The stealing analogy was accurate and based on YOUR opinion, not the UFC judges. And who cares if the judges didn't give GSP all 5 rounds? He still got 100% of the win (all $50.00) when according to you he only earned 40%.

LawL wrote: More stupidity.

This is where even you realize how stupid your point is/was and the conversation trials off in hopes of exhausting counterparts to the point where they give up so you get the last word.

BTW the way we are nearly there in the gun thread.

You said each round is worth $10, he didn't get awarded each round, and it wasn't a unanimous decision, therefore he doesn't get "all $50". Your ridiculous analogy fails on so many levels it's not funny.

A competitive fight ending in a decision cannot be deemed a robbery.

LawL wrote:You said each round is worth $10, he didn't get awarded each round, and it wasn't a unanimous decision, therefore he doesn't get "all $50". Your ridiculous analogy fails on so many levels it's not funny.

You said GSP won 2 rounds. If 2 rounds were worth $20.00 that's really all he should get. But since it's IMPOSSIBLE to award a fighter anything but 100% of the win, he gets all $50.00. Therefore, robbing JH of the win ($50.00). Only an idiot couldn't follow that. But I'm sure you'll figure out a way.

LawL wrote:A competitive fight ending in a decision cannot be deemed a robbery.

If the judging is skewed or predetermined, any fighter could be robbed of a victory at any time.

If a round is worth $10 and GSP was awarded 3 of those rounds then that adds up to $30. lol you're so stupid.

If judging doesn't go with the general consensus in a competitive fight then it is an unfavourable decision, not a robbery. No one but you has ever mentioned anything about the judging being predetermined.

LawL wrote:If a round is worth $10 and GSP was awarded 3 of those rounds then that adds up to $30. lol you're so stupid.

You said GSP only won 2 rounds. That's only $20. Looks like you're still struggling to avoid coming face to face with your stupidity.

LawL wrote: If judging doesn't go with the general consensus in a competitive fight then it is an unfavourable decision, not a robbery. No one but you has ever mentioned anything about the judging being predetermined.

I'm saying it's wasn't the "general consensus". Even you said HJ won the fight. And you haven't conversed with anyone else in this thread but me.

I'm referring to how many rounds the judges gave him to get the victory. Looks like you're too stupid to comprehend something so simple.

A decision going against the general consensus doesn't constitute a robbery.

You just want the last word, right?

Did you just reply again?

Pathetic... I win... ...

...the angry poor person award.

Robbed

A competitive fight can't be a robbery.

Dana White says you're wrong.

Media whore

He couldn't possibly be trying to increase interest in sales for a rematch, or trying force a retiring fighters hand

YourGrandpa wrote:Dana White says you're wrong.

You mean the guy who is renowned for his over-exaggeration and has been constantly criticised for his comments concerning GSP and the fight ever since it took place? lol nice one.

Yeah, the guy who owns the joint.

SHOOTIN SPREE A BREWIN!!!!

This is what happens when the brain receives too much information

due to gotta-have-last-word-in-ism

Gwamps just gets stuck in a loop, I think it's 2nd nature to lawl

"Ingredients, when properly mixed, sure to result in a vortex of boredom."

Fortune cookie wisdom 4tehwin!

The UFC seem like it's turning into the WWE and professional boxing. Predetermined outcome.

YourGrandpa wrote:Yeah, the guy who owns the joint.

And by owns "the joint" you mean "9%".

LawL wrote:And by owns "the joint" you mean "9%".

Yeah, you know, the guy who's idea it was to purchase the UFC and is still the President today.

That guy.

Possibly the worst opinion in all of MMA to reference.