Forrest Griffin vs. Rampage Jackson Official Scoring
Thanks to Dave Meltzer for this:
Adalaide Byrd scored the fight 48-46. He gave 4 and 5 to Jackson and Griffin 1, 2, and 3.
Nelson Hamilton had it 48-46, with 1 and 4 for Jackson, and Griffin getting 2 10-8.
Roy Silbert had it 49-46 with only round 4 for Jackson.
It was a very close fight, and Forrest winning is a justifiable decision. However, Roy Silbert and Adalaide Byrd have some explaining to do.
0 recs |
48 comments
Comments
They should be dismissed on the spot
A blind man would have scored round 1 for Rampage Jackson. I think we all need and quite frankly at $50 a pay-per-view, deserve an explanation for those two “judges”.
by Nick Travaglini on
Jul 6, 2008 2:53 AM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs
Take it up with the Athletic Commission, I guess.
by Richard Wade on
Jul 6, 2008 3:05 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Thanks for the info. Can’t say I agree with any of the judges, in my mind it should have been a draw.
by Andy R on
Jul 6, 2008 2:57 AM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs
I watched it again and I have it either 48-46 or 48-4 for Forrest depending on whether or not he did enough damage in Round 2 to justify a 10-8. Aside from that round, I have Forrest winning 3 and 5 with Rampage taking 1 and 4. When I watched it live I gave Round 4 to Forrest because of the triangle attempt but after watching it again I was convinced Rampage won that round.
by Richard Wade on
Jul 6, 2008 3:05 AM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs
I don’t know how you give round 4 to Forrest for a triangle attempt. Quinton would have had to do nothing the entire round to give it to Forrest simply based on that. The slam alone is enough to negate it.
by Mike Fagan on
Jul 6, 2008 3:12 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Because I wasn’t watching to keep score when I watched it live, but rather to enjoy the fight. I already explained that after watching it a second time paying attention to scoring that I gave it to Jackson.
by Richard Wade on
Jul 6, 2008 3:14 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I’m just trying to figure out how you could see it going to Griffin at all. Even if you weren’t watching it to score, I think you’d have to have been distracted for all but the 20 seconds Griffin worked the triangle. Basically, it wasn’t a very close round at all, so I’m just confused with what you saw.
by Mike Fagan on
Jul 6, 2008 4:23 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I thought the same thing when I heard Joe say that shit.
by zeroword on
Jul 6, 2008 10:34 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I was watching it with other people and it was more of a semi-distracted interpretation.
by Richard Wade on
Jul 6, 2008 4:49 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I originally thought Rampage was close to a 10-8 in Round 1. I also gave him round 4, and could see 5 going either way. I think the only damage Forrest did was in round 2 with the leg kicks and the ground and pound. Overall, I think Rampage did more damage, landed cleaner punches in much greater numbers and I would have given him the fight 48-47. Not giving him round 1 is inexcusable. I don’t see why Dana only holds contests where mma is sanctioned, when the sanctioning bodies can’t seem to hire competent judges.
by Fatal Error on
Jul 6, 2008 3:10 AM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs
Outside of Rampage getting 10-8 in R1, this is pretty much how I saw the fight.
The big question to me before hearing the decision was whether the judges were going to reward the cleaner, more powerful and damaging strikes from Quinton or the high volume of strikes that Forrest through, even though he didn’t do much damage and Quinton checked or avoided most of what came at him.
by Mike Fagan on
Jul 6, 2008 3:14 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I guess they favor volume over cleaner strikes. Thats what I thought when Page had a bad leg and was mounted. I was thinking that he needed a KO to win the fight cause Forrest will be outpointing him on strikes since he was punching and kicking more than Page..
by Johann on
Jul 6, 2008 3:14 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I’ll be interested to see the FightMetric on this fight.
by Richard Wade on
Jul 6, 2008 3:15 AM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs
FightMetric scores is it a draw. Forrest landed more strikes in every round except #4. Quinton by their scoring takes rounds 1 and 3 anyway thanks to landing more power shots.
by Richard Wade on
Jul 6, 2008 3:54 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Can FightMetric
Score 10-8s? If so, that may be their downfall in scoring thiso ne.
by JCS_FM on
Jul 6, 2008 11:09 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Sorry I meant..
If NOT, that may be… etc
by JCS_FM on
Jul 6, 2008 11:09 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
My prediction is Forrest will have landed more strikes, while Rampage will have landed more power punches, struck with greater accuracy overall. Griffin’s kicks were clearly the difference in this match. But they weren’t nearly as prevalent after round two. He only landed a few of them in the later rounds.
by Popetastic on
Jul 6, 2008 3:24 AM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs
Rampage definitely landed more power shots, but thought he landed fewer shots overall.
by Richard Wade on
Jul 6, 2008 3:28 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Yes but....
that is my main issue. How can you score just for strikes landed and not for damage delivered. because Rampage delivered way more damage and dropped Forrest twice from strikes while Rampage walked a little funny from leg kicks. I just don;t understand it.
by Nick Travaglini on
Jul 6, 2008 3:43 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
When was the second time he dropped him?
by Michael Rome on
Jul 6, 2008 3:48 AM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs
I don’t really understand how two of those judges scored the fight. Nelson Hamilton and I apparantly watched the same fight though..
I thought Rampage took the first fight, lost the second fight 10-8 as he basically did nothing except try to hug Forest for the entire round, I gave Forest the edge in round 3, Round 4 I gave to Rampage as I recall that was the round he took Forest down and I had Forest winning Round 5.
I’m slightly baffled by some people seeming to discount the sheer number of blows landed by Forest on the basis that Rampage’s punches looked like they hurt more. I agree Rampage had perhaps 4 or 5 really good punches. On the other hand to my eyes Griffen was, between kicks and punches, managing to land at least twice the volume of blows. Beyond that he was clearly the agressor for the entire fight, and as Rampage was hobling for much of the right I had Forest controlling the octogon as he constantly was forcing Rampage backwards.
by ChrisBat on
Jul 6, 2008 3:49 AM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs
Let me get this straight, your reasoning for a 10-8 round 2 is that “Jackson did nothing except try to hug Forrest”? You don’t think Forrest has to inflict some threshold of damage? Because while he dominated positionally, Rampage was never in danger of being finished.
I just looked at FightMetric and the only striking stats that Forrest outnumbers Quinton in is leg kicks. And considering that Quinton’s power shots did more damage on the feet, I think that the argument being made is defensible.
by Mike Fagan on
Jul 6, 2008 4:08 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Erk that should be round not fight in the second paragraph, evidently the hour is catching up to me.
by ChrisBat on
Jul 6, 2008 3:50 AM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs
I rarely say things like this, but summing it up…fucking horseshit.
I like both guys, but this left a really bad taste in my mouth. I won’t use terms like fixed, but incompetent is fair game. These judges should be absolutely ashamed of themselves. I don’t blame the UFC for the judging and will not bash them at all, though the card was not very entertaining.
Rd. 1 Clearly Rampage. Just as technical striking, with much more effective shots.
Rd. 2 Clearly Forrest. That leg kick hurt me, lol. And I’m sorry, but what damage did he do to deserve a 10-8 round? The only effective strike was the one leg kick. Yes he dominated the position on the ground, but he landed nothing damaging at all.
Rd. 3 Rampage. Again, far more effective blows. And for anyone that says Forrest was the aggressor in this fight, I say BS! They were equally aggressive, even on a bad leg for Rampage. The difference I saw, was whenever Jackson landed effective shots, Forrest ran away. Not that i blame him, but how does that make him the aggressor??
Rd. 4 Rampage. Same as Rd. 3
Rd. 5 Either one. I saw it as Rampage, but I have no problem with scoring it for Forrest.
So I have it 4-1 for Rampage, but 3-2 is acceptable. NO NO NO 10-8 round. Damn, for 10-8 you need to beat the shit out of the other guy, not even close imo. Look at them after the fight. Rampage looked exactly like he did before the fight and Forrest looked like he got run over by a truck (sorry Big Nog).
Again, I don’t blame the UFC, and I give Forrest credit for fighting a pretty good fight, but he didn’t win. Many more decisions like this, and I will definitely be put off some. Between people I watched with and talked to after the fight, which was about 20, NOT A SINGLE ONE even had this as a close fight. Congrats to Forrest, but this is by far the worst decision I have seen in the UFC.
"They said you was hung!!"
"And they was RIGHT!"
by BJJDenver on
Jul 6, 2008 4:13 AM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs
Absolutely.
i didn’t like that decision, but at least it was close enough that it wasn’t a complete travesty. I didn’t think tonights fight was even remotely close.
"They said you was hung!!"
"And they was RIGHT!"
by BJJDenver on
Jul 6, 2008 4:20 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Have you seen fightmetric’s assessment of that fight? Going on that type of stat, it was one of the worst decisions in MMA history for sure.
by Beer Monster on
Jul 7, 2008 10:18 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Which fight? Hamill/Bisping which they scored for Bisping or Griffin/Jackson which they scored a Draw, but their own numbers could easily be used to argue a win for Griffin?
by Richard Wade on
Jul 8, 2008 1:58 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
One more thing.
Am I the only one freakin’ sick of Rogan’s love for Eddie Bravo? I know most of the card was less than stellar and put more focus on the announcers, but I am sick of hearing Joe use Bravo’s terms all the time, over and over. Don’t get me wrong, I like Joe, but tonight had to have been one of his worst performances.
And Goldy really was awful. Other than the guy on Iron Ring, he must be the least knowledgeable announcer out there. Did he have a sheet of stupid questions he was reading off of tonight?
Usually Joe is pretty good and Goldy is bearable, but they were way off their game tonight, imo.
"They said you was hung!!"
"And they was RIGHT!"
by BJJDenver on
Jul 6, 2008 4:19 AM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs
I assume...
...you didn’t like the “crackhead control” reference? That is the name of the position as given by Bravo. I think you’d have a lot of people really upset if Joe just pulled a Jim Brown type “he has him all tied up like a pretzel” instead
Contributing Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.
"The reason a lot of people do not recognize opportunity is because it usually goes around wearing overalls and looking like hard work." -- Thomas Edison
by Brent Brookhouse on
Jul 6, 2008 10:44 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I think crackhead control was the only reference I remember him bringing up. And while I think all the names Eddie came up with are silly, it’s just fact that it’s to a point where most people (who train) know what they are – whether they want to or not.
When it comes down to it he’s just simplifying a position instead of having to fully describe where the person is. So it’s not really something to get upset about, I don’t think.
by Simco on
Jul 6, 2008 10:59 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Really? I honestly believe Goldie has gotten a lot better.
by Richard Wade on
Jul 6, 2008 4:51 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I think it was just probably the pacing of the fights last night, that put more of an emphasis on the announcers. I’m not calling for them to be gone or anything like that, just that last night was a bad performance imo, and they might need to freshen it up a bit.
"They said you was hung!!"
"And they was RIGHT!"
by BJJDenver on
Jul 6, 2008 7:55 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I much prefer him to the EliteXC goofball.
by mythbuster on
Jul 6, 2008 8:00 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
UNREAL !!!
First off I and the other people I was watching this fight could not believe the decision that being said if the judges all scored the fight the same I would still be pissed but I could see it up these score cards make me that much more mad ! What fight were the Judges watching how could they be so far apart on the same fight. IT seems like every other show in all of MMA UFC,Dreams,Elite XC,etc we get a horrible decision like this. Something has to be done or some one has to teach these judges about MMA !!! The old 10-9 scoring system that was ceated for boxing should not be in MMA, At best that fight should of been a Draw at best I would still have uestions about that ??? UNREAL
by Shocbomb on
Jul 6, 2008 5:48 AM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs
Rogan's Bias !!!
No BJ you are not the only one sick of Joe Rogan aqnd his total bias towards some fighters. It makes me sick !!! I have to watch the fights sometimes now no shit with the vloume off becasue I can’t stand his comintating that much, It horrible braodcasting how much favortism he shows at times.
by Shocbomb on
Jul 6, 2008 5:53 AM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs
wow i cant believe how mad every1 is. Dont be mad because you picked rampage to win this fight and he got his ass worked. I picked rampage to win and lost to alot of people. The first time I watched the fight I was shocked Rampage didnt win a round. I rewatched the fight 3 more time and forrest dominated every aspect of the fight. Maybe round 4 to rampage but the first round forrest was dominating the round peppering him with leg kicks and jabs. Rampage caught him but Forrest still was way more active. THe bottom line is he dictated and controled the whole fight even when he got on the ground he was back up. Even some people have the ignorance to compare it to elite xc. WOW. Also we all know how weirdly the ufc scored. Never put a decision in the judges hands. Especialy when your the champ.. Come on rampage shouldve smashed him and he didnt. THe ufc always has weird decisions for instance the cote fight i had almedia winning the first round not the 2nd round its just how it is. The scoring should have been closer yes but calling this the worst decision in ufc history and shit is out of line. It was hammil bisping where hammil beat the piss out of him and got screwed. Watch the the fight again and give the guy some credit.
by mlzybaby on
Jul 6, 2008 8:44 AM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs
You are saying Forrest even dominated the first?
by zeroword on
Jul 6, 2008 10:39 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Never put the decision in the judge’s hands is a ridiculous cliche. Fighters and fans have a right to be pissed when judges who obviously know nothing about MMA keep giving us shit decisions. It’s time for people who actually can score a fight closer to reality to be put in the position of judges.
I don’t think I have a problem giving Forrest the decision. But I have no idea how you could of given him round 1 since he got knocked down and was the closest of either fighter in the fight to being stopped.
by Fujin on
Jul 6, 2008 10:52 AM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs
I think Forrest dominated the 1st round UP UNTIL he got knocked down. I could give Rampage the 1st round absoloutley. Forrest in my opinion dominated and was dictating the 1st round before he got caught. The round couldve gone either way. He was nailing him with leg kicks. I hate seeing the belt change hands this way but it was a great fight if you watch it again i think more and more will agree the decision is justifiable.
by mlzybaby on
Jul 6, 2008 12:46 PM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs
I could have given Forrest round 1 before the knock down, but he definitely wasn’t dominating the entire round.
by Mike Fagan on
Jul 6, 2008 4:12 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Everyone forgot that Rampage said that Forrest whooped his ass. This is right after the fight.
by MrNiceGuyMMA on
Jul 6, 2008 1:22 PM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs
Does that justify these scores? I say no.
Hell, Forrest basically said the same thing.
by Popetastic on
Jul 6, 2008 1:45 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Forrest Griffin is the most overrated MMA fighter
He may be tough, loveable, and goofy. He’s also overrated. Forrest Griffin now leaps into uber-stardom with his (staged) victory over Quinton Jackson over the weekend. Once again, UFC proves how myopic it is with it’s view of MMA. Thankfully, Affliction is on it’s way and is primed to rescue us from the tyranny of Dana White and the UFC…didn’t want to take up all the space in this comment window, you can read the rest at:
http://fantasysportsmatrix.com/blogs/bobbybluechip/forrest_griffin_most_overrated_mma_fighter
by Bobby Bluechip on
Jul 7, 2008 9:36 PM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs














