UFC 132 Results: FightMetric Reports for Cruz vs. Faber, Siver vs. Wiman
by Mike Fagan on Jul 3, 2011 2:00 PM EDT
in UFC Analysis
Email
Print
We just couldn't escape a UFC event without some semblance of judging controversy, could we? Most people seem to agree with both of the close decisions at UFC 132 -- Dominick Cruz over Urijah Faber and Dennis Siver over Matt Wiman, but how do they numbers play out? FightMetric has reports for both fights:
- Right off the top, the fight thing I noticed about the Dominick Cruz vs. Urijah Faber report was that FightMetric did not credit Faber with any knockdowns. That will be a point of contention for a lot of people. I know the "knockdown" in the first round was more a result of Faber putting Cruz off balance and then landing a right hand, rather than the force of the blow acting as catalyst. It'll take a rewatch (and I can assure you there will be many rewatches on my end) to confirm, but I'll trust FightMetric for now.
- FightMetric scored the bout 49-47 for Cruz, giving round 5 for Faber and awarding a 10-10 in round 4.
- Cruz outlanded Faber in both total and significant strikes in every round of the fight. In the single round scored for him, Faber had the advantage in strikes to the head 9-4. Cruz held the biggest disparity in the third, outscoring Faber 23-7 and 21-5 in total and significant strikes, respectively.
- Cruz went 4-13 in his takedowns, Faber 1-5. FightMetric credited Cruz with a sweep/reversal in the third.
- In the Dennis Siver vs. Matt Wiman report, FightMetric scored the bout 29-28 for Wiman.
- Siver outlanded Wiman in total strikes for the fight (128-34), but edged Wiman 31-26 in significant strikes. In the second round, unanimous scored for Wiman, Siver landed 42 strikes to Wiman's 19, but of those 42, only 3 fell under FightMetric's criteria for significant (to Wiman's 12.)
- The most contentious round is the third. Again, Siver wins on volume, 47-6. This time, however, he also takes significant strikes 11-6. Yet, FightMetric scored the round for Wiman. Why? Siver only landed 1 power strike (Wiman had 3), and Wiman scored two takedowns and a guillotine attempt.
57 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I just don't see how you can score Siver/Wiman for Wiman.
He was ineffective at getting takedowns and couldn’t keep Siver down for any length of time, his sub attempts weren’t tight, and he got outpointed on the feet. The most effective thing he did was shrug at the Siver spin kick.
Cooper! Get two coffins. Wait...better make it three.
Chief Editor of Nobody Gives a Fuck About Your Blog
That's all in regards to the third btw.
Cooper! Get two coffins. Wait...better make it three.
Chief Editor of Nobody Gives a Fuck About Your Blog
by lowellthehammer on Jul 3, 2011 2:04 PM EDT up reply actions
I thought it was a draw. Siver takes the first and third 10-9, Wiman had the second 10-8. I thought Wiman’s second round was far more dominant and punishing then Anthony Njokuani’s first round against Winner.
Wiman won that fight .....
…. unless this is K1 , boxing or some other striking based fight . Great Siver won the striking battle & lost the takedown battle , the damage battle & and the ground battle as a whole .
" Everyone has a plan 'till they get punched in the mouth. " ~
Mike Tyson
by MidWayMonster54 on Jul 3, 2011 2:14 PM EDT up reply actions
He didn't lose the takedown battle in the third.
Wiman ineffectively shoved him against the fence and ate a bunch of punches, and when he finally got the takedown Siver popped back up.
Cooper! Get two coffins. Wait...better make it three.
Chief Editor of Nobody Gives a Fuck About Your Blog
by lowellthehammer on Jul 3, 2011 2:16 PM EDT up reply actions
So the second round meant nothing ?? Wiman kept ....
…. Siver down for something like 4 mins of that round , did a ton of damage & landed the most significant shots of the entire fight . Siver won the first round no doubt . He was the more active fighter and won every exchange in that round . The third round Wiman got his takedown , kept Siver down for a short period of time & then Siver popped back up . To me thats two rounds to one for Wiman because that third round was his based on the lack of aggression by Siver . In my eyes the most significant thing that happened in the third round was the takedown , no matter how brief it was .
" Everyone has a plan 'till they get punched in the mouth. " ~
Mike Tyson
by MidWayMonster54 on Jul 3, 2011 2:23 PM EDT up reply actions
Wiman won the second, nobody's disputing that.
The first was Siver’s round, nobody’s disputing that either. In the third Wiman’s only significant offense was a takedown which led to nothing. That doesn’t win you a round.
Cooper! Get two coffins. Wait...better make it three.
Chief Editor of Nobody Gives a Fuck About Your Blog
by lowellthehammer on Jul 3, 2011 2:26 PM EDT up reply actions
Tell that to ....
… Rashad & numerous others whom have won that way . And when its the only significant action in the round it can win a round .
" Everyone has a plan 'till they get punched in the mouth. " ~
Mike Tyson
by MidWayMonster54 on Jul 3, 2011 3:27 PM EDT up reply actions
When I say it led to nothing
I mean Siver popped back up immediately. That scores no points at all. Point me to a case of a guy winning a round based on one takedown and a couple seconds of ground time with no GNP.
Cooper! Get two coffins. Wait...better make it three.
Chief Editor of Nobody Gives a Fuck About Your Blog
by lowellthehammer on Jul 3, 2011 3:30 PM EDT up reply actions
It has scored points in the past ....
… and this just furthers the point that MMA needs to overhaul its judging . Still even with that said I saw at worst a draw .
" Everyone has a plan 'till they get punched in the mouth. " ~
Mike Tyson
by MidWayMonster54 on Jul 3, 2011 3:36 PM EDT up reply actions
No it doesn't.
Just the opposite actually. You’re trying to give a round away based on a single takedown with no effective ground work or striking to back it up. The judges scored it correctly. Doesn’t sound like a case for an overhaul to me.
Cooper! Get two coffins. Wait...better make it three.
Chief Editor of Nobody Gives a Fuck About Your Blog
by lowellthehammer on Jul 3, 2011 3:59 PM EDT up reply actions
What exactly did Siver do to win the third ?
" Everyone has a plan 'till they get punched in the mouth. " ~
Mike Tyson
by MidWayMonster54 on Jul 3, 2011 4:06 PM EDT up reply actions
Outstruck Wiman and controlled where the fight took place.
What exactly did Wiman do to win the third? Nothing.
Cooper! Get two coffins. Wait...better make it three.
Chief Editor of Nobody Gives a Fuck About Your Blog
by lowellthehammer on Jul 3, 2011 4:14 PM EDT up reply actions
agreed
Siver also scored with several "hammer"fists while Wiman was trying to get him down for too long.
"No man dies for what he knows to be true. Men die for what they want to be true, for what some terror in their hearts tells them is not true."
So Wimans ...
…. two takedowns & submission attempt did nothing in the third ?? Its not like Wiman just laid there and did nothing . He attempted a submission & attempted to land some GnP . Siver landed 1 significant shot ( Wiman landed three ) the entire round and your gonna give him the round based on he outstruck Wiman with minimal damage ? Sorry I just don’t see the logic there .
" Everyone has a plan 'till they get punched in the mouth. " ~
Mike Tyson
by MidWayMonster54 on Jul 3, 2011 4:33 PM EDT up reply actions
That's because you're reading stats
instead of watching the fight.
Cooper! Get two coffins. Wait...better make it three.
Chief Editor of Nobody Gives a Fuck About Your Blog
by lowellthehammer on Jul 3, 2011 4:35 PM EDT up reply actions
No I watched the fight ....
… and to me Wiman won .
" Everyone has a plan 'till they get punched in the mouth. " ~
Mike Tyson
by MidWayMonster54 on Jul 3, 2011 4:41 PM EDT up reply actions
Based on two takedowns that did nothing?
You a Wiman fan? Did you put money on him?
Cooper! Get two coffins. Wait...better make it three.
Chief Editor of Nobody Gives a Fuck About Your Blog
by lowellthehammer on Jul 3, 2011 4:43 PM EDT up reply actions
Neither . Also if I were goin by ...
… stats wouldn’t I be saying that Siver won the fight ? The stats ( striking wise ) were in his favor .
" Everyone has a plan 'till they get punched in the mouth. " ~
Mike Tyson
by MidWayMonster54 on Jul 3, 2011 4:58 PM EDT up reply actions
Wiman was taking shots to the face constantly
in the third round when he had Siver pinned against the cage.
Thats where most of the round was contested.
I’m not saying Siver’s punches were devastating or anything, but holding someone against the fence < getting punched in the face while holding someone against the fence.
And TDs that lead to nothing shouldn’t score much if any points. A sub attempt with > 10 seconds left in the round that isn’t close to finishing shouldn’t score much. Wiman was gassed, failed to get Siver down, and failed to really luanch any offense because he was so occupied with getting the fight to the ground. Wiman lost that round.
When I'm on the mic it goes down, CINTRON
-Joell Ortiz
by The Lethal Haze on Jul 3, 2011 5:17 PM EDT up reply actions
Just because we have seen it happen
don´t mean that is the right way to score it. Landing strikes count for way more than going for unsuccesful takedowns. Actually, fighting off takedowns and kepping the fight standing to keep landing strikes is one of the examples given in the rules about showing “Controle of the fighting area”. “countering a grappler’s attempt at takedown by remaining standing and legally striking” is the actual words in the rules.
Also, landing multiple strikes, specialy quality ones, count for more than getting a takedown that you do nothing with, specialy if your oponent gets right back to his feet.
If the takedown would truely have been the only thing to happen in the round, then you could make the arguement that it should have won him the fight, but there was alot more than just that going on.
The one thing that made me a bit hesitant about how to score the round was the submissions that Wiman went for. Here it was simply a matter of comparing Wimans guilliotines with the better striking of Siver. It was close and I would have no problems with a 10-10 round in the third, but I think Siver winning that round was the correct score.
Just because the judges have scored similar fights the other way don´t mean that they were wrong this time. In fact, if annything, THIS is the time they actually got it right and scored acording to the rules. A perfect example is Randy vs. Vera, where Randy was given a decission based on pushing vera to the fence and trying to go for takedowns, while Vera landed more and better strikes (even hurd Randy bad to the body at one point). Those are the type of fights where the judges got it wrong. Not this time. This time they actually seemed to have scored acording to the rules.
(The rules and scoring criteria is not really that bad, it´s just not implemented verry well)
"I´ve seen the future of the whole fucking thing and it´s Big Man Clarence Clemons!"
- Bruce Springsteen
The world became a less amazing place on June 18 2011, with the death of Clarence Clemons. R.I.P. Big Man, you will be sorely missed.
Some people don´t like the saxophone, but if you can´t rock to the Jungleland solo, you are dead inside!
The second round?
I thought it was more Wiman kept Siver down for more like two minutes, and that the G&P opened up cuts on Siver but didn’t really inflict too much damage him.
Why do I say that? Siver came out in the 3rd fresher than Wiman. He wasn’t on wobbly legs, his cardio wasn’t compromised. The only effects of damage we saw were the cuts… which didn’t even effect the third round.
When I'm on the mic it goes down, CINTRON
-Joell Ortiz
by The Lethal Haze on Jul 3, 2011 3:34 PM EDT up reply actions
No way in hell does Wiman deserve a 10-8 for the second.
It was a good round for him but it wasn’t THAT good.
Cooper! Get two coffins. Wait...better make it three.
Chief Editor of Nobody Gives a Fuck About Your Blog
by lowellthehammer on Jul 3, 2011 2:16 PM EDT up reply actions
Maybe it wasn’t a 10-8 round, but its seems Njokuani was given a 10-8 round mostly for the exchange against the cage, but Winner just kinda absorbed those shots. They didn’t seem to do as much damage as Wiman did to Siver, in a much more dominant round. I just don’t understand why one was a 10-8 and one was a 10-9. Maybe all the blood had something to do with it, but I still think Wiman dominated round 2 against Siver more then Njokuani did against Winner in round 1.
Njo had Winner out on his feet at a few points and was really battering him.
Wiman had some good shots from guard but never really stunned Siver. That’s the difference.
Cooper! Get two coffins. Wait...better make it three.
Chief Editor of Nobody Gives a Fuck About Your Blog
by lowellthehammer on Jul 3, 2011 2:27 PM EDT up reply actions
What Njokuani did
was attempted murder anywhere other than a sanctioned MMA fight.
"Run and tweet THAT, homeboy."
From memory, significant strikes are any strike from distance and any power shots in the clinch or on the ground. A power shot is any non-jab strike.
Twitter: @Mike_Fagan_13
@siver vswiman round 2, you need to do something with a takedown, you are not by default dominant in guard……
I am a staunch hater of all things L&P
but Wiman didn’t just hang out in guard. He stacked and threw G&P and tried to finish the fight. Unfortunately for him he didn’t hurt his opponent and appears to have gassed out while G&Ping Siver. 10-9 Wiman, for sure.
When I'm on the mic it goes down, CINTRON
-Joell Ortiz
by The Lethal Haze on Jul 3, 2011 3:36 PM EDT up reply actions
I'm so happy Wiman lost that
I’m glad he didn’t get the first for the TD at the end and I’m glad judges saw him winning the third too. I hate guys who spend 45 seconds trying to get a take down over and over. He got Siver in the second, but usually guys that employ Wiman’s strategy end up winning so I’m glad it didn’t work and Siver kept moving on. His TDD is looking really good. His problem seems to be getting up after being taken down though.
If the "knockdown" in the 4th didn't count, I give up...
Faber landed a punch square on Cruz’s jaw and Cruz went down. After that, Cruz stopped moving laterally and threw only one combo over the next 3:30 minutes. He was clearly not the same after the punch.
10-10 round n the 4th? I thought those knockdowns count for something. I call shenanigans
by itsnotthatserious on Jul 3, 2011 2:25 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
I feel the same way.. I saw Cruz knocked down twice in that fight, the other time he fell it was more of a slip..
Wonder what the fight would’ve been scored if fight metric credited those two knockdowns to Faber…
by sadface on Jul 3, 2011 3:32 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
I think Fightmetric can be sort of stingy with knockdowns
They didn’t credit GSP for one against Shields, either.
My name isn't Todd.
Siver rounds 1 and 3
Wiman round 2
I didn’t think it was that difficult to score.
Also,
Why the eff did Faber game plan to strike with Cruz? Get the takedown, GNP FTW
He didn’t gameplan to strike with him. He made several attempts to get a hold of Cruz in the first and couldn’t do it. Faber even had his arms locked around Cruz’s waste and still couldn’t get him down. After a couple more failed attempts in the second, Faber gave up for the most part. But the initial plan was clearly to put Cruz on his back.
I personally scored it for Wiman , but I can see rounds 1/3 going either way. Whenever one fighter has one dominant round and the other two are close it’s always tricky, ala Bisping/ Hamill and tons and tons of other fights like that… One dominant round and two close rounds doesn’t favor either or as it’s judged on a round by round basis…
by p123 on Jul 3, 2011 2:48 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
I had it that way too, but my friends that I was watching it with had it for Wiman. However, none of them could give me a good case for Wiman getting the third. If Wiman won, I wouldn’t have been too disappointed as it was a very close fight. However, I think that Siver did more in the third to get the win.
Check out the C&D Channel on YouTube for MMA reviews, predictions, analysis, and other MMA related content.
I was happy that Siver got the decision, I definitely think he won rounds one and three due to more effective striking and defending most of the takedown attempts. Pushing someone against the fence is not effective offense. And getting a takedown means nothing if the other guys pops right back up. However, the second round could’ve been 10-8, which would have meant a draw. But either way I was happy that the judges got it right, wasn’t expecting that. And what was up with Wiman’s repeated headbutts from top in the second? That was annoying, seemed like a conscious effort to worsen the cuts, surprised he didn’t get warned.
completly agree, but....
10-8 means that Wiman was close to stoping the fight and/or controlling the entire (!) round extremely dominant.
I just don’t see that. He made Siver bleed, but that was about it. I thought an elbow-rain like Penn-Fitch is easily a dominant 10-8, but Wiman didn’t land for a full round or even a fourth of it – if I’m not mistaken with “fourth” timewise. Fitch did.
"No man dies for what he knows to be true. Men die for what they want to be true, for what some terror in their hearts tells them is not true."
Yes, well. I think there aren’t nearly enough 10-8 rounds being awarded. Considering the current judging standards, I agree it was probably a 10-9. If things were more as they should be, I think it probably should have been 10-8. It was definitely a more dominant round than the ones Siver won anyway.
by Horselover Fat on Jul 3, 2011 3:17 PM EDT up reply actions
I think the cut had alot to do with the 10-8 people are wanting to give out.
It certainly looked bad for Siver, but he looked unfazed the entire time on the mat. He wasnt even trying to defend the elbows all that much.
by sadface on Jul 3, 2011 3:26 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
The Wiman fight shows the problem with round by round scoring. As a whole, if that fight was 1 15 minute round, no one can possibly believe that siver won it. But, since siver edged out (maybe) the first and third rounds, wiman’s utter domination of the second counts for nought.
I think Wiman deserved a 10-8 round in the third and I think you could make the argument for a 10-10 round in the third. This fight IMO should’ve been a draw at least, a Wiman victory at best. Just goes to show that you’ve got to finish fights.
"It is unlikely that anyone has ever read Nietzsche or Derrida and has been inspired to open a soup kitchen"
no strike Cruz landed in that fight was
Significant. Faber won the fight. Scored knock downs in almost every round. Cruz scored more points I guess.
"Many have the will to win. Few have to will to prepare to win."
" A black belt only covers 2 inches of your ass. The rest is up to you." - Royce Gracie
"Wanderlei eventually got to his feet and stalked Fujita like a Japanese octopus in an all-female prison." - Sean Baby Cracked.com
by the-gentle-way on Jul 3, 2011 3:36 PM EDT via mobile reply actions
They always get omit sweeps and KD's
Unless you cleanly sweep from your guard or half guard into theirs, good luck getting it scored.
"Run and tweet THAT, homeboy."
Knockdowns don´t score like in boxing
in MMA. Just because you land a punch that sends your oponent to the ground don´t automaticly give you a hughe advantage. In MMA, you have to look at how significant the strike actually was. If a guy goes down and comes right back and don´t seem hurt, and the strike in itself did not seem like a realy powerful strike, it don´t count for alot more just because your oponent sat down. In boxing all knockdowns are equal in the scoring, but that is not how it works in MMA.
Knockdowns are nowhere to be found in the scoring criteria. Number of strikes and significance of those strikes is what counts. Alot of times a knockdown is the result of a really powerful, flush strike, but sometimes, it´s just a really good strike that cought your oponent off balance. When you score MMA, you have to look at the individual knockdown and decide which it was, not just say, “Hey thats a knockdown. That is hughe!”
"I´ve seen the future of the whole fucking thing and it´s Big Man Clarence Clemons!"
- Bruce Springsteen
The world became a less amazing place on June 18 2011, with the death of Clarence Clemons. R.I.P. Big Man, you will be sorely missed.
Some people don´t like the saxophone, but if you can´t rock to the Jungleland solo, you are dead inside!
B.T.W.
that is not a comment on who won the fight, just on the discussion of scoring knockdowns.
I had the fight for Cruz, but I do feel like I should rewatch it just to make sure.
"I´ve seen the future of the whole fucking thing and it´s Big Man Clarence Clemons!"
- Bruce Springsteen
The world became a less amazing place on June 18 2011, with the death of Clarence Clemons. R.I.P. Big Man, you will be sorely missed.
Some people don´t like the saxophone, but if you can´t rock to the Jungleland solo, you are dead inside!
At one point
I felt like Cruz landed his hardest punch right on urijahs face. And Faber ate it and kept going.
i really thought that would have been a draw.
that was a hell of a fight, though.
by Victor Rodriguez on Jul 3, 2011 6:25 PM EDT reply actions
I'm a wrestling mark AND a Coloradan.
Wiman lost the third.
When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this sign, that the dunces are in a confederacy against him. - Jonathan Swift
Editor, HeadKickLegend.com
Still Subo at Fightlinker.com
Both fights were very very close
and both of them are definitely worth debating about.
But I felt like the judges did a damn good job this card (but all those KOs made their jobs easier)
I think Cruz-Faber is worthy a couple of rewatches, even only for the join of the fight. Cruz won it clearly though
by Carlos Estrada-Ibars Martínez on Jul 4, 2011 7:02 AM EDT reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Bloody Elbow
Related FanShots on Bloody Elbow
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
MMA Rankings
