How did you score Nunes vs Schevchenko?

[Ted Williams' head]

I had it 48-47 Nunes but thought it could have been 48-47 Schevchenko, or even a draw.

I had it 48-47 Valentina but like you said could have easily been 48-47 the other way or a draw.

In a fight like that with so many indecisive rounds, you can't really complain about a judges decision either way. I love Valentina but you can't throw your hands up and act surprised when you lose a razor close fight. Take it out of the judges' hands and get the finish or win the rounds so emphatically that they can't possibly give it to your opponent.

 

[Atto]

48-47 Schev..Nunes won round 1 and 5.. was clearly outstruck.. her polar opposite gaethje wannabe kicks were her best weapon along with those "Range finders"

Nunes probably won round 5 with GSP (lay n prey)

 

[SlapheadGiraffe]

Just hope they don't have a rematch.
May have been the time I was watching it but it was boring as fuck. Not quite Woodley v Wonderboy but, you know ...

 

[Silverball]

48-47 Nunes

 

[Drake]

RD1 Nunes
RD2 Shev
RD3 10-10
RD4 Shev
RD5 Shev


3 & 5 were the closest rounds. The others were close too, but clear who edged them. Nunes didn't do anything with the takedown at the end so she shouldn't have been rewarded more points than Valentina for how active she was being from the bottom. Those strikes were good too. I think that part of the fight was probably the decider. Especially looking at the scorecards.

 

[TalkingLeaf]

So the only thing those three agreed on was R1? Something odd about that, I didn't see the fight, was it really that open to interpretation?

Round one was the only clear cut round. I think nunes landed more in the next few rounds but that's including weak leg kicks. Schevckenko seemed to land more head strikes but she was letting nunes push forward. Forward aggression may tip the scales in a close round.

these fighters seem to forget that judges are sitting cageside and not watching the ppv broadcast. Sometimes a strike that lands looks blocked from a different angle and sometimes a punch that doesn't land looks like it does. schev's strategy leads to close rounds where on one clean strike can determine the round. If you fight with that strategy done be surprised when you lose, especially if the other fighter is more aggressive.

Schev has no one to blame for that loss other than herself.

 

[BenAskrensStrikingcoach]

48/47 Valentina, and that is being generous to Nunes, didn't land a good shot the entire fight, empty pressure.

Even when Valentina gave her back up off the failed takedown, Nunes couldn't do anything with it. The take down was nothing bar landing in guard and absorbing shots.

 

[Shorinji]

48-47 Nunes IMO

 

[regular john]

48/47 Valentina, and that is being generous to Nunes, didn't land a good shot the entire fight, empty pressure.

this is the deciding factor IMO. neither did much but Nunes did nothing. how can you win a fight without landing one good shot? yet it happens in the ufc and Glory all the time.

the point about judges not seeing it clearly from bad angles cageside is very true. but if we had good judges and a clear system it wouldn't happen so often. in muay thai pretty much every fight at the highest level looks like a draw to the untrained eye but the judges' decisions are always coherent. in mma it looks like they flip a coin and go with it.

 

[ECC170]

Nunes probably won round 5 with GSP (lay n prey)

Lol I won't dispute it..schev won that fight

 

[Atto]

This is what happens when you lose Ronda. Good or Bad she was always entertaining .

 

[BenAskrensStrikingcoach]

this is the deciding factor IMO. neither did much but Nunes did nothing. how can you win a fight without landing one good shot? yet it happens in the ufc and Glory all the time.

the point about judges not seeing it clearly from bad angles cageside is very true. but if we had good judges and a clear system it wouldn't happen so often. in muay thai pretty much every fight at the highest level looks like a draw to the untrained eye but the judges' decisions are always coherent. in mma it looks like they flip a coin and go with it.

I don't understand it, I suppose it is hard to see from the judges perspective.

This wasn't really that close a fight, Shevchenko outstruck her in every round bar the first.

Nunes really didn't land anything of significance, even in the first round.

 

[Enock-O-Lypse Now!]

Been a hardcore fan since UFC 1 and I honestly had no clue there was an event last night. They have diluted and messed up the system so bad I no longer really even care. Since they abandoned the rankings system for "Money Fights" I've lost interest ..also the fact they are not making an interim title for every other fight is ridiculous.

Add in sketchy judging in just about every event ..then to realize that the UFC selects the judges and flies the same cast of characters across the Globe to judge these events it becomes apparent ...these Judges are in on the fix along with referees like Herb Dean -- lot of money being passed around in Vegas ..if you can sway the odds in your favor just a bit ...why not do it?

Didn't watch the fight but i had Schevchenko winning an easy decision.

 

[Howard Moon]

After an unexpectedly entertaining undercard, I scored the main event zzzzz.

 

[Robbie Hart]

I didn't watch it

 

[ender852]

RD1 Nunes
RD2 Shev
RD3 Shev
RD4 Shev
RD5 Shev but i dont have a problem with Nunes getting it.

same here, nunes with the first and that's it. i don't think 2 takedowns with 0 GNP should win you a round where you clearly lost on the feet. you should have to score strikes while on top of your opponent to steal the round.

 

[The EZ Life]

I had it 48-47 Nunes but thought it could have been 48-47 Schevchenko, or even a draw.

Was there a 10-8 round in there? Or do you think judging should have 9-9/10-10 rounds? Or just a draw brecause it was too close to call?

 

[Bozy]

Round 1-Draw
Round 2-Shevshenko
Round 3-Shevshenko
Round 4-Shevshenko
Round 5-Nunes

But wasn't a robbery in my opinion.