UFC Fight Night: Dillashaw vs Cruz

[Dignan]

Forgot to add the extra time onto my recording, as the card ran late.

Cut out as TJ was walking out. How s**t.

Will have to wait for the replay later tonight.

 

[Bengals]

I scored it to Cruz 3 rounds to 2 but I wasn't confident leading into the decision being read.

I was 80/20 confidence wise. Once I heard 49-46 TJ...it went to about 5/95

I thought it'd be the champions nod again.

Although, after the Condit fight I have no clue.

Faber will be pissed. He probably thought he was going to be fighting TJ for the title. Get that fight going.

I did enjoy Cruz rolling his eyes at TJ's role model comment. That little snake in the grass would only be a role model to high school jocks. I can't believe Justin Buchholz was still in TJ's corner.

 

[biggiemediums]

Now that my excitement has gone down I can see how some could think TJ won. I might be a bit biased being a boxing coach I'm always counting head movement and good defensive rolling towards points.

Anyway. Really good fight!

 

[Crimson Azure]

Alvarez hump fest.

Three rounds in and I have Cruz 3-0 up.

Idk who wins so unless it's a finish it better be Cruz.

 

[matty lloyd the champ]

1 4 5 TJ.

Cruz is so damn elusive but he is the definition of point fighter. Get a few meaningless takedowns here and there, whilwt throwing in some pitter patter strikes along the way. I can't sayI'm a fan.

 

[Barry Roundhouse]

1 4 5 TJ.

Cruz is so damn elusive but he is the definition of point fighter. Get a few meaningless takedowns here and there, whilwt throwing in some pitter patter strikes along the way. I can't sayI'm a fan.

he landed quite a few hard shots.. cruz won the fight IMO but I wouldn't argue with ur score card.

close fight but I was stoked to see cruz get it after all injuries.

his ability to make TJ miss was mind blowing. this was meant to be a fight between two guys with great foot work offensively and defensively, but to me, cruz's movement made TJ look pedestrian. It was almost like he knew he couldn't keep up with cruz in that regard, so he just kept his feet flat and followed him around punching and kicking air. Very unlike what we have seen from him in his recent fights.

 

[Jab]

Alvarez hump fest.

I was pretty angry watching that fight. Pettis is one of my favourite fighters but the game plan was clever. I think the post fight press conference I appreciated Alvarez a little more. He was honest and said that the fight wasn't great but he had to use the tools that he had to get the W. It was a frustrating fight to watch but I don't see a title shot being his next fight.

Speaking of the post fight press conference, did anyone see Travis Brown turn on the reporter? It was awkwardly hilarious

 

[nobbyiscool]

1 4 5 TJ.

Cruz is so damn elusive but he is the definition of point fighter. Get a few meaningless takedowns here and there, whilwt throwing in some pitter patter strikes along the way. I can't sayI'm a fan.

I'm always very conscious of the fact that I'm not an expert when it comes to MMA - I'm really only judging from the eye test.

That said - I saw this fight pretty much the same way you did. I thought 1,4 and 5 were all Dillashaw, and even though round 1 could've been contentious, I have no idea how judges could've awarded Cruz either of the last 2 rounds.

I don't even know if it's only Cruz who is the definition of a "point fighter" though. The whole division seems stuck in this "point fighter" mindset because they lack the power of the bigger weight divisions - this is why, aside from McGregor, the old WEC weight divisions still aren't a draw, and why a title fight can headline a FS1 card.

 

[biggiemediums]

I'm always very conscious of the fact that I'm not an expert when it comes to MMA - I'm really only judging from the eye test.

That said - I saw this fight pretty much the same way you did. I thought 1,4 and 5 were all Dillashaw, and even though round 1 could've been contentious, I have no idea how judges could've awarded Cruz either of the last 2 rounds.

I don't even know if it's only Cruz who is the definition of a "point fighter" though. The whole division seems stuck in this "point fighter" mindset because they lack the power of the bigger weight divisions - this is why, aside from McGregor, the old WEC weight divisions still aren't a draw, and why a title fight can headline a FS1 card.

Same way most MMA fighters on twitter had Cruz winning. 4th round was unanimously TJ's round. No one should dispute that. Round 5 though. He went straight back to hitting Cruz at the end of his punches. Nothing TJ landed was clean apart from the 4th round. That's why strikes landed is always a crap statistic IMO.

It's the same thing that happens with some of my kids. They throw punches in bunches and to a lot of people it seems like they're landing all these shots, but to someone judging and analysing a fight (as a judge obviously should,) they see that these punches although technically 'landing'. Aren't truly landing. If the opponent is landing a few less shots. But better, cleaner shots. It goes to them. On top of all of that. Cruz dictated the fight. TJ was moving forward, yes. But Cruz played his game. TJ chased and played Cruz' game.

2,3 Cruz.
4 TJ.
1,5 No real wrong answer now that I watched a replay.

 

[Jab]

I like the discussion around the scoring in this fight particularly. My personal opinion is that Condit beat Lawler and that Cruz beat TJ. This might say more about me as a fan than the fights.

Yes, TJ has the pressure in the fight, but what does forward movement meant when you miss a lot due to the movement of your opponent? Does controlling 4 mins of the round mean nothing if you get clipped or get deliver a decent punch? These questions also need to be adjusted according to each fight.

TJ wanted to push the pace, that was his game plan but Cruz didn't allow it to become affective. Lawyer wanted to brawl and was successful on the few opportunities that he had, but Condit dictated the fight. While every fight can pick on things to improve, which figure ultimately had their way. For me, it's Cruz and Condit.... (and Alvarez, but I deny ever saying this )

 

[ThePezDispenser]

Forgot to add the extra time onto my recording, as the card ran late.

Cut out as TJ was walking out. How s**t.

Will have to wait for the replay later tonight.

Yep.

Mine is set for an extra 10 minutes at the end of each recording so I got half way through the first.

Soooo annoying!!@

 

[BradWCE]

I see this as basically the same as Condit/Lawler from a judging perspective. Condit probably should have won, but it was so close that I don't really care. Dillashaw probably should have won, but it was really close.

4 and 5 were clear Dillashaw rounds to me. 2 was Cruz's round. 1 and 3 were close. Rewatched it and scored it 48-47 Dillashaw with him winning rounds 1, 4 and 5. 49-46 Dillashaw with him winning 1, 3, 4 and 5 I could easily see. Don't see how Cruz won 4 rounds. 1 judge gave Cruz the 4th round which is hard to comprehend as it was the clearest of the fight for either man.

Cruz's striking was much better than it was before; both offensively and defensively. In past fights you could label him a point fighter, but I don't think that makes sense in this fight. He sat down on his punches and threw with power when it made sense to do so. He didn't do that in the 2nd Faber fight or the Johnson fight. He didn't get backed up to the cage as much or as easily as he did in the Johnson fight. He wasn't as hittable when he moved in as he was in the Faber fight. I think this was the best Cruz has ever looked which is hard to believe after all the time off with terrible injuries. The Cruz from the 2nd Faber fight or the Johnson fight wouldn't have come close to winning IMO.

I thought Dillashaw won but I can't have much of a problem with the decision because it was so close and because of Cruz's story. Just being able to compete with Dillashaw after what he's been through is amazing. Being able to arguably win is ridiculously impressive.

 

[NSWCROW]

 

[BradWCE]

I still think evading strikes should play some part in scoring a fight. Judges scores are all subjective so obviously percentage is irrelevant but even by sight you can easily tell that he is landing a small percentage of strikes BECAUSE of the opponent's movement and evasion and that alone should be considered

I don't think defence should be scored. The reward for defending well is that you avoid being hit and then it allows you to land strikes to score.

This is taking it to the extreme obviously but here goes. If a fight is a striking contest for the entire round and nobody lands anything, but one fighter shows better defence by evading more strikes, who wins the round? 10-10 is the only score that makes sense to me.

 

[biggiemediums]

I don't think defence should be scored. The reward for defending well is that you avoid being hit and then it allows you to land strikes to score.

This is taking it to the extreme obviously but here goes. If a fight is a striking contest for the entire round and nobody lands anything, but one fighter shows better defence by evading more strikes, who wins the round? 10-10 is the only score that makes sense to me.

This is true, but it's not what happened. Cruz was landing the much cleaner shots. Also dictating the fight.

 

[Red Black and Blue]

Crazy scorecard. Can't understand how Tony Weeks gave Cruz 4 & 5 and how D'Amato gave TJ round 3.

 

[Jab]

Imagine sitting next to this on the plane.

 

[Red Black and Blue]

Also dictating the fight.

What does that mean? He had barely any ring control, was constantly moving backwards and laterally.

Some of the worst fights are two counter fighters waiting for the opponent to make the first move. I get the art form of counter boxing but you are reliant on the other guy moving forward. Not something that should be rewarded in the fight game.

 

[Guy Threepwood]

Cruz's striking was much better than it was before; both offensively and defensively. In past fights you could label him a point fighter, but I don't think that makes sense in this fight. He sat down on his punches and threw with power when it made sense to do so. He didn't do that in the 2nd Faber fight or the Johnson fight. He didn't get backed up to the cage as much or as easily as he did in the Johnson fight. He wasn't as hittable when he moved in as he was in the Faber fight. I think this was the best Cruz has ever looked which is hard to believe after all the time off with terrible injuries. The Cruz from the 2nd Faber fight or the Johnson fight wouldn't have come close to winning IMO.

I disagree this is the best Cruz has ever looked. I haven't watched all his fights, but his performance against Bowles was clearly the best I've seen him. He's easily a step slower than he was prior to all the injury issues.

I haven't rewatched the fight in order to score it yet, but had the impression that Cruz was well and truly in control through three rounds. Dillashaw wasn't putting much together at all and was winging head kicks and big shots in order to try and hurt Cruz who was moving well and scoring when he threw. The last two rounds were much better for TJ, but I think Cruz was rightfully awarded the win. I'll endeavour to re-watch it over the next few days to score the fight.

Was super impressed with Font on the undercard. Admittedly it was against a last minute replacement, but he looked dynamic on the feet and ended the fight with a very impressive TKO. I would like to see him in against a top 15 guy next.

Was also impressed with Massaranduba's evolving game and continued ability to laugh in the face of father time. I'd like to think he's natural, but for him to be showing such improvements at 37 is suspicious. Regardless, Pearson's a tough out for anyone at 155 and he did a great job in beating him. And that slam in the first round...

 

[biggiemediums]

What does that mean? He had barely any ring control, was constantly moving backwards and laterally.

Some of the worst fights are two counter fighters waiting for the opponent to make the first move. I get the art form of counter boxing but you are reliant on the other guy moving forward. Not something that should be rewarded in the fight game.

You mistake ring control with JUST moving forward. If TJ was connecting every hit and Cruz was moving backwards to avoid TJ because he was being beaten then yeah that makes sense. But Cruz was the reason TJ was plodding forward and missing. That = dictating the fight. It's not like TJ was getting takedowns either... that was all Cruz. So again. The stats in this fight mean absolutely nothing. Rewatch the fight without Rogan's pathetic TJ nuthugging and watch TJ's ineffective shots. Yeah they land. They land as Cruz is moving backwards. They have the impact of a soft slap.

TJ wants his opponent to sit in the corner like a statue and let him unload. Cruz didn't do that.

 

[Barry Roundhouse]

Rogans TJ bias was pretty annoying and I could see how that could sway a score card for someone sitting at home.

offence is defiantly much more important than defence but it's not like cruz was moving backwards without connecting.

if two fighters land the same amount of equally powerful shots in a round, but one fighter throws twice as many punches and is made to miss because of good head movement and footwork, even if that's moving backwards, the fighter with good defence wins that round IMO.

I'm not even sure of how judges are ment to weigh aggressiveness vs defence but that's always been my view of it.

 

[Dignan]

Finally got to have a proper watch, trying to look at it purely from a scoring perspective.

I pretty well came up with this too.

2,3 Cruz.
4 TJ.
1,5 No real wrong answer now that I watched a replay.

1 - I probably would have given to TJ, but could have gone either way. 5 - I honestly have no idea. Flip a coin.

I feel like Condit-Lawler was a reasonably clear Condit win in my mind, and the decision left a bit of a bad taste in my mouth. This one was ridiculously close with the two opposing styles obviously playing to people's preferences and biases. You can debate the finer points but can see how judges could have sided either way.

Congrats to Cruz on the incredible comeback.

 

[Red Black and Blue]

Having rewatched the fight twice tonight, It comes down to round 1. 2nd/3rd Cruz, TJ 4th and 5th.

Gone through it round 1 and slow mo'd each significant strike and I reckon Cruz connects about 8 times, TJ about 11. Though Cruz has the two best strikes of the round around 4.08, I think you've undersold how good TJ's kicking was, a solid leg kick, two good body kicks and the one to the back of the head. Probably would still edge TJ but wouldn't have been opposed to the draw like Sherdog had it.

Also checked the Judging.

• Judges shall evaluate mixed martial arts techniques, such as effective striking, effective grappling, control of the ring/fighting area, effective aggressiveness and defense.
• Evaluations shall be made in the order in which the techniques appear in (c) above, giving the most weight in scoring to effective striking, effective grappling, control of the fighting area and effective aggressiveness and defense.
• Effective striking is judged by determining the total number of legal strikes landed by a contestant.
• Effective grappling is judged by considering the amount of successful executions of a legal takedown and reversals. Examples of factors to consider are take downs from standing position to mount position, passing the guard to mount position, and bottom position fighters using an active threatening guard.
• Fighting area control is judged by determining who is dictating the pace, location and position of the bout. Examples of factors to consider are countering a grappler's attempt at takedown by remaining standing and legally striking, taking down an opponent to force a ground fight, creating threatening submission attempts, passing the guard to achieve mount, and creating striking opportunities.
• Effective aggressiveness means moving forward and landing a legal strike.
• Effective defense means avoiding being struck, taken down or reversed while countering with offensive attacks.

It doesn't really help the argument as it highlights my point about defence counting for nothing without actually scoring, but highlights your point about his lateral movement counting towards controlling the fighting area.

For mine it reads as a system trying to have it both ways and coming off inconsistent in it's attempt.

 

[biggiemediums]

Having rewatched the fight twice tonight, It comes down to round 1. 2nd/3rd Cruz, TJ 4th and 5th.

Gone through it round 1 and slow mo'd each significant strike and I reckon Cruz connects about 8 times, TJ about 11. Though Cruz has the two best strikes of the round around 4.08, I think you've undersold how good TJ's kicking was, a solid leg kick, two good body kicks and the one to the back of the head. Probably would still edge TJ but wouldn't have been opposed to the draw like Sherdog had it.

Also checked the Judging.

• Judges shall evaluate mixed martial arts techniques, such as effective striking, effective grappling, control of the ring/fighting area, effective aggressiveness and defense.
• Evaluations shall be made in the order in which the techniques appear in (c) above, giving the most weight in scoring to effective striking, effective grappling, control of the fighting area and effective aggressiveness and defense.
• Effective striking is judged by determining the total number of legal strikes landed by a contestant.
• Effective grappling is judged by considering the amount of successful executions of a legal takedown and reversals. Examples of factors to consider are take downs from standing position to mount position, passing the guard to mount position, and bottom position fighters using an active threatening guard.
• Fighting area control is judged by determining who is dictating the pace, location and position of the bout. Examples of factors to consider are countering a grappler's attempt at takedown by remaining standing and legally striking, taking down an opponent to force a ground fight, creating threatening submission attempts, passing the guard to achieve mount, and creating striking opportunities.
• Effective aggressiveness means moving forward and landing a legal strike.
• Effective defense means avoiding being struck, taken down or reversed while countering with offensive attacks.

It doesn't really help the argument as it highlights my point about defence counting for nothing without actually scoring, but highlights your point about his lateral movement counting towards controlling the fighting area.

For mine it reads as a system trying to have it both ways and coming off inconsistent in it's attempt.

Couldn't agree more about that last line mate. Spot on. It changed in 2011 and you are right. It's trying to have it both ways.

 

[Peter Sidorkiewicz]

I had a 48-48 draw. Round 1 I had a 10-10 round. I honestly could not split them. Round 2-3 Cruz and Round 4-5 Dillashaw.