Josh Gross' First SI.com Article

by Nick Thomas on May 3, 2008 9:35 AM EDT

Titled 'Who cares what you think -- it's the judges' call':

Ringside seats don't necessarily guarantee the best view of a fight. Especially, thought Renato Verissimo, if you don't know what you're watching.
It wasn't just that judges for Verissimo's June 2004 welterweight showdown against Matt Hughes unanimously dissented his performance. No, what bothers the Brazilian welterweight to this day is that he did exactly what he wanted, what he was bred to do. And it was as if his fighting philosophy had been rendered moot.
"Your jiu-jitsu is no good here," yelled two judges through 30-27 scorecards.
"You feel like, what you were thinking -- what it takes to win -- wasn't the same for the judges," Verissimo said. "I thought that I did more than [Hughes] tried to do in the fight."
By most accounts, Verissimo's right.

Josh comes out firing in his first article and BJ Penn's arguments for better judging are worth the read. Check it out.

The FanPosts are solely the subjective opinions of Bloody Elbow readers and do not necessarily reflect the views of Bloody Elbow editors or staff.

Tweet Comment 8 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Re: Josh Gross' First SI.com Article

that hughes charuto was one of the biggest abortions in the history of the sport..... i remember watching that one live at the time and just being in disbelief... if there was ever a 10-8 round in MMA, it was the first one for charuto yet two of the judges didn't give it to him. Hell it coulda plausibly been a 10-7 round. The other two rounds matt got top position but turtled up and did absolutley nothing for fear of getting triangled or armbar-ed. i don't even think hughes thought he won the fight, he just kinda shrugged his shoulders after the decis was announced. This was a boxing-ish crappy decision, making me wonder if the fix was in.

by robnashville on May 3, 2008 10:08 AM EDT reply actions

Re: Josh Gross' First SI.com Article

Pics or it's fake.

I mean: Video link anyone? :-)

-- Don't believe a word I say, I don't train BJJ

by jemaleddin on May 3, 2008 12:26 PM EDT reply actions

Re: Josh Gross' First SI.com Article

Ok Rob you are a little high if you think there were any 10-8 rounds in that fight let alone a 10-7.

I have been of the belief ever since I watched that fight that Charuto won. Hughes spent a vast portion of I think two rounds stuck in a fucking triangle choke. No one seemed to care though, and when the scorecards were read out, not even Joe Rogan blinked an eye.

by SCupitt on May 4, 2008 2:43 AM EDT reply actions

Re: Josh Gross' First SI.com Article

charuto was completely dominant in the first round, not just slightly better, which would call for a 10-9 round. renato was just completely clowning matt on the ground. he had three separate sub attempts in that first round, one was that triangle he had in the middle of the round that was very deep and iirc an armbar of some type towards the end of the 1st.... hughes had next to no offense in the round because he was having to fight off sub attempt after sub attempt. that round was a blow out round for charuto, one that justified more than the usual run of the mill 10-9 round.

if you aren't going to give this a 10-8 round, would you ever give out a 10-8 round?

by robnashville on May 4, 2008 8:56 AM EDT up reply actions

Re: Josh Gross' First SI.com Article

The fact Hughes scored a takedown and maintained top position, regardless of the submission attempts from the bottom means that it isn't a 10-8 round.

For it to be a 10-8 round the opponent has to be completely dominated with both positioning and damage. The fact Hughes stays on top for the round is enough for him to get positioning points.

Alistair Overeem completely dismantling Buentello is a 10-8 round. Nate Quarry battering all parts of Starnes' body as he runs backward not throwing anything is a 10-8 round. Liddell working the heavy bag that was Jeremy Horn was a 10-8 round.

I for one personally believe 10-8 rounds should be given out more frequently. People refer to it as the "half point system" but instead of giving half points, i just give whole points to make everything cleaner.

By this I mean, if its a really close round the winner gets it 10-9, if the round is competitive but one fighter is clearly more dominant then its a 10-8 round, and if one fighter completely dominates the other in all facets and scores heaps of damage, then its a 10-7 round.

by SCupitt on May 5, 2008 1:00 AM EDT up reply actions

Re: Josh Gross' First SI.com Article

"The fact Hughes scored a takedown and maintained top position," This a amateur wrestling mentality and one that needs to go.......renato showed more domination from his position then hughes ever did in that fight.... top position is a neutral position if you're doing nothing with it, like hughes was or is a losing position if you are getting worked over with jiu jitsu like hughes was.... "Alistair Overeem completely dismantling Buentello is a 10-8 round. Nate Quarry battering all parts of Starnes' body as he runs backward not throwing anything is a 10-8 round. Liddell working the heavy bag that was Jeremy Horn was a 10-8 round." so from the examples you have given, you can only get a 10-8 round from striking......i tend to disagree......

by robnashville on May 5, 2008 4:37 AM EDT reply actions

Re: Josh Gross' First SI.com Article

I've always thought it was tricky to base a decision on submission attempts. Unless the attempt is somehow doing damage it seems like rewarding someone for throwing haymakers and missing. I'm just not sure if it makes sense to reward submission attempts any more than it makes sense to reward throwing more punches regardless of landing any. Does that make sense?

Intentional Blog on Balls

by Richard Wade on May 6, 2008 12:29 AM EDT up reply actions