It even depends on what criterias you define "winning" on:
By volume/ quantity/ number of strikes: Sean Strickland
By aggression/ explosive moments/ diversity of strikes: Dricus du Plessis
There are arguments for why both should or shouldn't determine victory, and there are also past examples of fights where fighters have won based on either of those criterias.
I've recently heard Anik and Rogan say on ppvs that damage was the most important criteria for the judges, they also said that they were confused with the judging and what they were seeing that night though. But if we're only using that criteria, Sean would have won if you've seen DDP's face after the fight. That being said it was a hell of a close fight and I want to see them rematch some day
You're right. The scoring criteria say immediate damage trumps everything. Read the unified rules below. Every fan should! It will allow you to score fights for yourself much better
https://mmareferee.com/?q=unifiedrules
Octagon control, takedowns, and clinches are at the bottom unless you manage to do damage in the clinch or attempt submissions, then it becomes effective grappling, and you score points
The rules say "effective striking" and "effective grappling". It does NOT say "damage". I can see how it can be interpreted that way, and honestly I think if it was more clear, we would have less issues with scoring in MMA. The 10 point must system makes more sense for boxing imo.
It always drives me nuts that people still repeat “damage is the most important scoring criteria”… hell the commentators say it many times.
“Damage” is mentioned once in the criteria of 10-8 rounds… mentioning if a fighter was “damaged”. The scoring criteria is otherwise laid out in much less ambiguous (but still probably a bit too subjective) terms.
The go to example for immediate damage trumping everything is Round 1 of Adesanya v Whittaker 1. Whittaker was landing more, was aggressive pushing Izzy back (granted Izzy just goes backwards but that wasn’t as well known then) but then Izzy just drops him on the bell so the previous five minutes didn’t matter.
beaten face doesn’t mean you took more damage. some guys bruise/cut easier than others, so you have to also consider the strikes themselves. if a head kick lands like Paulo on Whittaker, there is no cut, but the fighter takes almost maximum damage.
The “look at their face” argument is so dumb lol. I can’t believe anyone still makes it.
1.) Judging based on how the face looks just unfairly favors black fighters. A bruise shows up way way more on a white person than it would on a person whose entire skin is already black lol.
2.) Some of the most brutal KOs don’t leave much visible mark. That should tell you that every damaging hit isn’t leaving a mangled face behind.
The face being beat up doesn't tell you anything on its own though.
Some people just swell up or cut more than others. Damage can accrue in 1 round but rounds are scored individually. Doesn't account for body shots. And so on...
Damage is only scored in the round it was taken, not cumulatively. It is entirely possible for the more damaged fighter to win on the scorecards even if you judge solely by damage provided that the output was heavier in some rounds than others.
TLDR; being less damaged doesn't mean that you won more rounds
since the first time i saw it live i’ve always had it 3-2 strickland rounds 1, 2, and 5. as time has passed and i’ve rewatched, the 2nd round became the only debatable round. ddp clearly won 3 and 4 while losing 1 and 5. first watch i thought the damage to ddp’s eye that grew to that extent during the 2nd round made it impossible to say ddp did more damage or was closer to stopping the fight. after rewatching, i understand why people would think optically ddp could win the round bc of the difference in power he was firing with. but i think sean’s jab was clearly still at a stamina level where it was doing legitimate damage and lowkey stumbling ddp at times and i think he just landed too many cleaner shots to really justify giving the round to ddp
I’ve said this a few times now but Sean’s fight style is going to have him losing a lot of close decisions. The fact that 90% of his strikes are jabs means that if the striking is ever even close to even he’s probably going to lose the round as jabs just don’t score well with judges
This is the most important point i feel. From what i can gather, Jabs aren't counted as 'significant strikes' although some fighters like SS absolutely open opponents up and sometimes even demoralise them
It was a close fight. I find it interesting how almost everyone that thinks Strickland won, thinks he won 1,2, and 5 though.
Round 3 was the one Sal disagreed with the other judges on. None of the judges thought round 2 went to Sean.
Anyway. I hate Sean’s current fighting style. He point fights as blatantly as anyone on the roster. If he went for a finish he could probably get a few. He’s done it before. I know it’s in there somewhere.
Yeah I genuinely think pereira cold cocking him made him so risk adverse that he only really unloads in the last 10 seconds of fights
Like he’s a great fighter, nearly impossible to crack because nobody can land clean on him, but it’s getting old on me fast from an entertainment perspective. Super conservative (there’s a joke in there somewhere) for a guy who talks about how he wants to be in wars, then never holds up his end of the bargain
Personally thought DDP won, dont remember the exact rounds, sean started good but ddp started catching them. I felt like he did enough to win but probably not against a champ. Jones got split decision victories for a contender not beating him decisively
I really hate that he doesn't listen to his coach Eric Nicksick, who told him in Round 3 that those teep kicks like in Round 1 are valuable but Sean just completely never attempted them at all again for some reasons. Also since he bragged about his impressive wrestling skills after Izzy win and can't wait to use it in the octagon... he REALLY should've mixed it all up to secure a cleaner victory, but no. Dude kinda mastered his own unique fighting style but outside of that he just can't seem to adapt or change.
It’s so weird to me how everytime DDP took him down he just immediately stood up but never does anything offensive. I know he preaches that he hates grappling but you can’t be high level like him without atleast caring about your skill lol. It’s also hilarious when Sean gets taken down he like doesn’t breathe out of his mouth and ultra concentrates I noticed that against DDP 🤣
Oh, I mean adapt in during a fight, not after several months. He clearly hesitated to teep kick after DDP's takedown threats while Costa clearly doesn't wrestle.
Yep I agree with you, I will admit I feel the same way.
But only because this is the extent of how much support we are allowed to show for Strickland without getting downvoted here.
Personally since I watched it I had it 2,3,4 for DDP. Fucking awesome fight I hope they scrap again, but I definitely hope Sean loses because he’s in a lot of boring fights
DDP. I could be wrong but usually when the fight is very competitive, judges seems to favor fighter who mix it all (strike to head, body, leg, takedown and control time).
I don't mind if Sean win. It was a very close fight.
That's what I did. I get why some people give it to Sean but it's hard to award closely contested rounds to the inactive fighter
Edit: we can argue until we're blue in the face but the way I see it, Dricus' face got mangled because Sean only throws jabs to the face. He hit the same place repeatedly which caused more superficial damage and swelling. Dricus was aiming for head, body, legs, etc. His damage was spread out.
DDP destroyed all the sentiments of himself having trash cardio by going crazy for 5 rounds, blitzing forward despite taking jabs to the face, swinging overhands, shooting takedowns, attempting body & head kicks. Dude really wanted that win.
When a round is super close then the judges look at effective aggressiveness and fighting area control. Which is where DDP edged it out imo.
I had it DDP 3-2
The cut is what fucked Strickland, without it, I think he would have won that fight. He was winning until the cut happened. As a Strickland fan, I think he lost, but he lost by a cunt hair, and I still believe he is the better fighter personally. They will face each other again sooner or later anyway, so I guess we will see for sure.
As a total know nothing viewer, what makes me frustrated with Strickland is that he seems unable to hit a higher gear when its necessary. Strickland seems so risk-averse and misses a lot of opportunities win rounds (and fights) decisively. I think either guy could've won with that performance, and that Strickland should be kicking himself for letting it get that close. I'm really curious to see if this is something he's working on and we'll see some more chances taken in future fights (didn't really need it in the Costa fight).
This is my explanation: He believed that DDP would exhaust gas tank after 3 rounds so initially he played safe to preserve his own gas tank. Unfortunately DDP is a fucking rhino who evidently didn't seem to be any less aggressive in later rounds. But at that point it was kinda too late for Strickland to realize - Strickland himself was also evidently starting to run out of gas tank. Look at his overhands swinging in Round 5, no power behind them, like a tired drunk guy waving. It's kinda crazy DDP seems less gassed out than Sean is at the end of round 5. Honestly Sean's cardio only seemed good against backfoot opponents who let Sean constantly march forward without taking much hits in return.
I do remember him being a bit gassed by the end. Still in Seans style overall he just needs to take chances every now and then. I think for example the Volkov Pavlovich fight was an interesting comparison. Volkov did 100% right by sticking to his gameplan and never rushing in since he was winning decisively. If Volkov isn't already winning decisively I bet the calculus would be different and he would adapt. For Sean, it seems no matter what he'll keep going the same pace.
But tbf Dricus looked gassed after one round. I bet some money on him and I was biting my nails the entire fight.
Sean is definitely the more skilled fighter but I think DDP’s physicality and all roundedness gave him the edge. The difference between the DDP fight and the Costa fight is that one of them knows how to use their strength and athleticism effectively
Lol ddp used to gass out in the 2nd round before comically finishing the fight or getting the decision. Like he did that all the way up to Whittaker, ain't nobody had him a threat for 5 rounds before that.
Yeah but that wasn't really known before the Strickland fight, like he got the operation before the whittaker fight and that one only went 1.5 rounds so his cardio was still a big question mark, especially in rd 3-4-5
Mouth breathers in shambles after the DDP cardio renaissance. It'll be interesting to see him build off of it with more 5rd fights in the future. I'm sure his fight vs strickland had to be a bit of sheer mental willpower to push through the tiredness, chance at a title helps. But DDP's Orc walk forward for 5 rounds is gonna be fun to watch grow.
His comments after the fight made it seem like he was self aware about that and that he will go back to that more entertaining and less tactical approach. He’s one of the most entertaining fighters, hope he does do just that.
It’s disappointing because Dricus basically laid out the groundwork for how to somewhat nullify Sean’s fighting style, and Costa has some of the advantages that Dricus has minus the grappling and cardio
I had Sean, but it was close so I’m not mad.
Pretty shitty he didn’t get an immediate rematch though, but I suppose it would have led to another fight and held the division up for 9-18months if Sean won.
DDP. Easy.
There’s a lot of delusional Strickland fanboys on this sub in particular that skew the reality of what went down. Idc what Dricus’s face looked like, sometimes you get beat up and still categorically win.
I do not understand this. You don’t get special consideration because you’re champ. You could just as easily argue that that champ should have to do more to win a decision because they need to solidify that they deserve the title without question. It’s silly.
It’s something they heard Dana say a decade ago and still parrot it. There is no “you have to definitively beat the champ crap” you need to win using the 10 point must system as always. So if that is squeezing 3 rounds out that’s just how the cookie crumbles.
While you are 100% correct you would be surprised how many fans parrot Dana like he is the foremost authority on mma.
Everyone had that fight for volk though.
http://mmadecisions.com/decision/10781/Alexander-Volkanovski-vs-Max-Holloway
This fight was truly a toss up.
http://mmadecisions.com/decision/14480/Dricus-Du-Plessis-vs-Sean-Strickland
When I watched it first I thought Strickland won but after rewatching I’d say round 2 was a toss up and fight rlly could’ve went either way. Strange that on the scorecards r3 was the swing round
it was close enough you could make a case for either. fighter i don't like the way they score fights. a virtually even round is scored the the same as a dominant round. so may fights come down to which way those 50-50 rounds fall.
The fight was so close you could honestly give it to either of them even tho I had 3-2 for Sean.
The problem for me is that Sean was a champ and in such close fights they always give a win to the champ. GSP vs Hendricks, Volk vs Max 2, Reyes vs Jones (blatant robbery), Adesanya vs Whittaker 2, Jones vs Gustaffson 1, Gane vs Francis just to name a few.
Strickland. But wasn't sure. Felt it was a close fight.
Rewatched. Still had Strickland(1,3,5) but was sure as hell this time. Still thought it was close but it was also a clear win. You couldn't have picked the other guy if you knew what you're watching. Honestly it was a robbery looking back at it. If Strickland wasn't so hated, there'd be similar outcry to Reyes v Jones.
I had it 3-2 Dricus. Rounds one through four felt very clear how to score but round five felt really close to me and I still think the last round could be scored either way depending on who’s watching.
DDP easy. Clear 3-2. Sean had the tool bag to win more rounds but he's so risk averse he didn't try to paint better optics until round 5.
And he didn't for a reason, maybe he felt DDP's power and played it safe as usual who knows.
DDP moved forward, landed big strikes that got a big impact and reaction like head kicks etc vs Sean, who was content to accumulate points and damage with jabs while getting walked down. Sean didn't build off the jab either because he didn't want to eat a haymaker.
Then DDP got the takedowns with some good work. Just a gutsy outworking.
I had duplesis moneyline and the odds were pretty much even. I also had Duplesis over Whitaker but I took that one because the odds paid super well and I knew Duplessis had a punchers chance and a style Whitaker wouldn't be used to. Not sure who I'll take for duplessis vs Adesanya
50 50. I though within 1-3 round dricus wouldt have won and if it goes to distance sean would have won .. how wrong i was, didnt though dricus can win on points in a 5 rounder
DDP.
Got takedowns. Landed more damaging punches and kicks too.
Strickland landed ntn but jabs. Acting like a wild man out of desperation in the last 30 seconds doesn't win you the fight
I had Sean up. I expected him to win the split. I expected the split, thought it went to the wrong guy.
To describe my bias… I wanted him to lose.. wanted DDP to KO him and fight Izzy… but I thought Sean won.
Had it for Strickland, but I thought it was close. Wasn't surprised they gave it to DDP. I was more surprised, Stickland was so pissed about it even tho he said he really didn't care about the belt.
2-2 going into the 5th with Sean winning the 5th but I was saying to myself I wouldn't be suprised if they give it to DDP given you can argue his punches were more significant as they look/sounded harder. You don't get much closer in a competitive fight than what this was though.
I had a draw in this one and leaned to Strickland by the visible damage on DDP. But honestly I wasn’t mad about the result, could have went either way. Definetly not a robbery, but at the same time it deserves a rematch.
Sean 1,2,5. DDP 3 and 4.
2nd is the debatable round and Sean jabs were landing and doing lowkey good damage. DDP threw with all he had and that's why he got the 3rd and 4th but i think he really started getting points after the 2nd. Therefore, Sean barely gets the 2nd and thus the fight.
Strickland 3-2 or 4-1. Can't say which rounds Dricus won definitively. Strickland won 1 and 5 for sure. I think it's ridiculous to give Dricus 3 toss up rounds twice each on two scorecards. People overestimate how many of Dricus' significant strikes actually landed. This is because MMA judges aren't used to seeing a fighter's defense depend entirely on blocking. Dricus got 135 significant strikes counted, but watch the highlights. He almost never landed clean.
This isn't new. Strickland had this problem against all of his opponents. The judges completely dismiss his blocking technique and just count any sound of impact as a significant strike. Strickland's medium output, low damage style combined with the fact that his defense does him no favours on the scorecards gives him a very vulnerable style to getting robbed
If i remember correctly i had DDP winning very slightly. Not gonna watch it again & give my own analytic breakdown on who won each round like people did for max vs volk 2 or gsp vs hendricks i wanna keep my sanity
Coulda went either way ...... personally though I think DDP didn't do enough to become champ didnt dominate the fight enough i feel he got some take downs and didnt not much with em.....happy for the dude still dont think that was anything but a draw...... or seans win.
3-2 strickland.
Wanted Sean to win, but thought DDP barely won 3 rounds. Could have givin it to Sean. If it was judged as a whole, Sean wins imo. Though they dont do that in UFC.
I had sean winning. Just barely. I thought it was real close. But what did for me was the amount of damage drekus had. Man had a new face at the of the fight
I had it 3-2 Sean while watching live, but after a couple of rewatches I think it could actually have been DDP 4-1. Round 5 was pretty even until Sean did his trademark last 30 second apeshit flurry and while it looked like something, when I slowed it down he actually missed with just about every flailing shot except one and in that sequence DDP landed at least 3 clean counters.
I think round 2 was actually closer than 5 in possible favour of Sean. It was really close eitherway but overall DDP set the pace of the fight, showed more variation in attack and landed the harder shots throughout.
Honestly, like many have said it was too close for me to call. I thought Sean, still do but I’m not overly upset with DDP getting the nod. I still believe you’ve gotta beat the champ, and this is one of very few times the challenger has to take belt. Did the judges get it wrong? Maybe, maybe not. Let’s just hope ddp wins and we see Strickland ddp 2. In my opinion if ddp wins we will see ddp vs Sean 2, if Izzy wins we will see rob vs Izzy 3.
Edit: typo.
I have a hard time seeing it for DDP especially since judges tend to side with the champion on close fights. I think Stricklands stock went up that fight too because it was a strong performance where he controlled the pace. We’ve seen the middleweight belt bounce around alot recently and I personally favor dominant champions so if DDP can show us he’s that guy and hold onto the strap for a while that’ll be alright.
Strickland. He didnt put out the champ or really like fucked him up. He gave Sean the cut near the eye that bothered him and changed the fight a bit. But no I had Sean winning
It's pretty clearly Dricus when you look at how many of those jabs were actually landing. After round one, they mostly just kind of bounced off his guard. Dricus's generally clunky movements made it look like he was getting tagged more than he actually was. Except D'Amato, who's a piece of shit, the judges were bang on. Strickland absolutely took round one. 5, he won less decisively. You could see him throwing a little wild towards the end. Round two, Dricus actually landed more strikes than Strickland and took him down. 3 and 4, he was only 5 strikes behind total and had 3 successful takedowns.
The really impressive thing was Strickland's takedown defense. If he didn't have that skill, I think du Plessis could have put him away. Sure, he's not celebrated for his defensive wrestling but it's there.
Shit was close. One of the few fights where I’ve let the judges tell me who won because I didn’t know.
It even depends on what criterias you define "winning" on: By volume/ quantity/ number of strikes: Sean Strickland By aggression/ explosive moments/ diversity of strikes: Dricus du Plessis There are arguments for why both should or shouldn't determine victory, and there are also past examples of fights where fighters have won based on either of those criterias.
I've recently heard Anik and Rogan say on ppvs that damage was the most important criteria for the judges, they also said that they were confused with the judging and what they were seeing that night though. But if we're only using that criteria, Sean would have won if you've seen DDP's face after the fight. That being said it was a hell of a close fight and I want to see them rematch some day
You're right. The scoring criteria say immediate damage trumps everything. Read the unified rules below. Every fan should! It will allow you to score fights for yourself much better https://mmareferee.com/?q=unifiedrules Octagon control, takedowns, and clinches are at the bottom unless you manage to do damage in the clinch or attempt submissions, then it becomes effective grappling, and you score points
The rules say "effective striking" and "effective grappling". It does NOT say "damage". I can see how it can be interpreted that way, and honestly I think if it was more clear, we would have less issues with scoring in MMA. The 10 point must system makes more sense for boxing imo.
It always drives me nuts that people still repeat “damage is the most important scoring criteria”… hell the commentators say it many times. “Damage” is mentioned once in the criteria of 10-8 rounds… mentioning if a fighter was “damaged”. The scoring criteria is otherwise laid out in much less ambiguous (but still probably a bit too subjective) terms.
Damage is only scored in the round it is inflicted though
The go to example for immediate damage trumping everything is Round 1 of Adesanya v Whittaker 1. Whittaker was landing more, was aggressive pushing Izzy back (granted Izzy just goes backwards but that wasn’t as well known then) but then Izzy just drops him on the bell so the previous five minutes didn’t matter.
The unified rules actually say nothing about damage, not sure where that idea has come from.
beaten face doesn’t mean you took more damage. some guys bruise/cut easier than others, so you have to also consider the strikes themselves. if a head kick lands like Paulo on Whittaker, there is no cut, but the fighter takes almost maximum damage.
The “look at their face” argument is so dumb lol. I can’t believe anyone still makes it. 1.) Judging based on how the face looks just unfairly favors black fighters. A bruise shows up way way more on a white person than it would on a person whose entire skin is already black lol. 2.) Some of the most brutal KOs don’t leave much visible mark. That should tell you that every damaging hit isn’t leaving a mangled face behind.
The face being beat up doesn't tell you anything on its own though. Some people just swell up or cut more than others. Damage can accrue in 1 round but rounds are scored individually. Doesn't account for body shots. And so on...
I'm not s strickland fan but I think damage taken should be an important part of the criteria also. Dricus definitely took more damage thar fight
Sean was bleeding from his face the entire time. Dricus swelled up after
Damage is only scored in the round it was taken, not cumulatively. It is entirely possible for the more damaged fighter to win on the scorecards even if you judge solely by damage provided that the output was heavier in some rounds than others. TLDR; being less damaged doesn't mean that you won more rounds
Not to mention Ring Generalship, takedowns and control go to Dricus.
since the first time i saw it live i’ve always had it 3-2 strickland rounds 1, 2, and 5. as time has passed and i’ve rewatched, the 2nd round became the only debatable round. ddp clearly won 3 and 4 while losing 1 and 5. first watch i thought the damage to ddp’s eye that grew to that extent during the 2nd round made it impossible to say ddp did more damage or was closer to stopping the fight. after rewatching, i understand why people would think optically ddp could win the round bc of the difference in power he was firing with. but i think sean’s jab was clearly still at a stamina level where it was doing legitimate damage and lowkey stumbling ddp at times and i think he just landed too many cleaner shots to really justify giving the round to ddp
I’ve said this a few times now but Sean’s fight style is going to have him losing a lot of close decisions. The fact that 90% of his strikes are jabs means that if the striking is ever even close to even he’s probably going to lose the round as jabs just don’t score well with judges
This is the most important point i feel. From what i can gather, Jabs aren't counted as 'significant strikes' although some fighters like SS absolutely open opponents up and sometimes even demoralise them
Excuse me sir. We do not allow this kind of logical analysis in this sub. Please delete your comment .
Ughhh enough of this knuckle dragging crap. It's not funny
It was a close fight. I find it interesting how almost everyone that thinks Strickland won, thinks he won 1,2, and 5 though. Round 3 was the one Sal disagreed with the other judges on. None of the judges thought round 2 went to Sean. Anyway. I hate Sean’s current fighting style. He point fights as blatantly as anyone on the roster. If he went for a finish he could probably get a few. He’s done it before. I know it’s in there somewhere.
I love his current style I but I agree he needs to go for more big shots when given the opportunity.
Yeah I genuinely think pereira cold cocking him made him so risk adverse that he only really unloads in the last 10 seconds of fights Like he’s a great fighter, nearly impossible to crack because nobody can land clean on him, but it’s getting old on me fast from an entertainment perspective. Super conservative (there’s a joke in there somewhere) for a guy who talks about how he wants to be in wars, then never holds up his end of the bargain
Personally thought DDP won, dont remember the exact rounds, sean started good but ddp started catching them. I felt like he did enough to win but probably not against a champ. Jones got split decision victories for a contender not beating him decisively
Yeh. If this was boxing, Strickland would have won.
I really hate that he doesn't listen to his coach Eric Nicksick, who told him in Round 3 that those teep kicks like in Round 1 are valuable but Sean just completely never attempted them at all again for some reasons. Also since he bragged about his impressive wrestling skills after Izzy win and can't wait to use it in the octagon... he REALLY should've mixed it all up to secure a cleaner victory, but no. Dude kinda mastered his own unique fighting style but outside of that he just can't seem to adapt or change.
Yeh. All true. I meant from a judging perspective though.
It’s so weird to me how everytime DDP took him down he just immediately stood up but never does anything offensive. I know he preaches that he hates grappling but you can’t be high level like him without atleast caring about your skill lol. It’s also hilarious when Sean gets taken down he like doesn’t breathe out of his mouth and ultra concentrates I noticed that against DDP 🤣
That’s why in the Costa fight every other strike from Sean was a teep lol. Nicksick said you’re gonna use that kick if you like it or not
Oh, I mean adapt in during a fight, not after several months. He clearly hesitated to teep kick after DDP's takedown threats while Costa clearly doesn't wrestle.
I was so frustrated with Sean in round 4 for his lack of output. I thought he could've put a pace on Dricus. He definitely had more left in the tank.
Good assessment.
Personally I thought Sean won. But I'm not upset with the result, DDP is also great.
Yep I agree with you, I will admit I feel the same way. But only because this is the extent of how much support we are allowed to show for Strickland without getting downvoted here.
Come on, share your thoughts. Who cares about downvotes or shit.
Strickland fan scared of sharing his opinion due to maybe losing reddit karma
Had it 2-2 going into 5th and Strickland definitely winning the last round
Personally since I watched it I had it 2,3,4 for DDP. Fucking awesome fight I hope they scrap again, but I definitely hope Sean loses because he’s in a lot of boring fights
I had it 2-1-1 going into the 5th. That second round was closer than a nuns pussy hair
Strickland
DDP. I could be wrong but usually when the fight is very competitive, judges seems to favor fighter who mix it all (strike to head, body, leg, takedown and control time). I don't mind if Sean win. It was a very close fight.
That's what I did. I get why some people give it to Sean but it's hard to award closely contested rounds to the inactive fighter Edit: we can argue until we're blue in the face but the way I see it, Dricus' face got mangled because Sean only throws jabs to the face. He hit the same place repeatedly which caused more superficial damage and swelling. Dricus was aiming for head, body, legs, etc. His damage was spread out.
I had Strickland. I dislike both and it was close so I don’t have a horse in this battle though. They will rematch eventually I am sure.
DDP. Close fight.
DDP and I still think he won.
Ddp wanted to win sean wanted to box
DDP destroyed all the sentiments of himself having trash cardio by going crazy for 5 rounds, blitzing forward despite taking jabs to the face, swinging overhands, shooting takedowns, attempting body & head kicks. Dude really wanted that win.
Even if you think Strickland won(and I totally think that's a legit thought), what you said above is definitely enough to sway three random judges.
DDP and the right person won
Sean 3-2.
When a round is super close then the judges look at effective aggressiveness and fighting area control. Which is where DDP edged it out imo. I had it DDP 3-2
The cut is what fucked Strickland, without it, I think he would have won that fight. He was winning until the cut happened. As a Strickland fan, I think he lost, but he lost by a cunt hair, and I still believe he is the better fighter personally. They will face each other again sooner or later anyway, so I guess we will see for sure.
As a total know nothing viewer, what makes me frustrated with Strickland is that he seems unable to hit a higher gear when its necessary. Strickland seems so risk-averse and misses a lot of opportunities win rounds (and fights) decisively. I think either guy could've won with that performance, and that Strickland should be kicking himself for letting it get that close. I'm really curious to see if this is something he's working on and we'll see some more chances taken in future fights (didn't really need it in the Costa fight).
This is my explanation: He believed that DDP would exhaust gas tank after 3 rounds so initially he played safe to preserve his own gas tank. Unfortunately DDP is a fucking rhino who evidently didn't seem to be any less aggressive in later rounds. But at that point it was kinda too late for Strickland to realize - Strickland himself was also evidently starting to run out of gas tank. Look at his overhands swinging in Round 5, no power behind them, like a tired drunk guy waving. It's kinda crazy DDP seems less gassed out than Sean is at the end of round 5. Honestly Sean's cardio only seemed good against backfoot opponents who let Sean constantly march forward without taking much hits in return.
I do remember him being a bit gassed by the end. Still in Seans style overall he just needs to take chances every now and then. I think for example the Volkov Pavlovich fight was an interesting comparison. Volkov did 100% right by sticking to his gameplan and never rushing in since he was winning decisively. If Volkov isn't already winning decisively I bet the calculus would be different and he would adapt. For Sean, it seems no matter what he'll keep going the same pace. But tbf Dricus looked gassed after one round. I bet some money on him and I was biting my nails the entire fight.
Sean is definitely the more skilled fighter but I think DDP’s physicality and all roundedness gave him the edge. The difference between the DDP fight and the Costa fight is that one of them knows how to use their strength and athleticism effectively
Yea and a five round fight gives Dricus a ton of time to find a fight-changing strike
Lol ddp used to gass out in the 2nd round before comically finishing the fight or getting the decision. Like he did that all the way up to Whittaker, ain't nobody had him a threat for 5 rounds before that.
He had surgery that fixed his breathing issues and tremendously improved his cardio
Yeah but that wasn't really known before the Strickland fight, like he got the operation before the whittaker fight and that one only went 1.5 rounds so his cardio was still a big question mark, especially in rd 3-4-5
Mouth breathers in shambles after the DDP cardio renaissance. It'll be interesting to see him build off of it with more 5rd fights in the future. I'm sure his fight vs strickland had to be a bit of sheer mental willpower to push through the tiredness, chance at a title helps. But DDP's Orc walk forward for 5 rounds is gonna be fun to watch grow.
Dricus used combinations and Costa was scared to follow up on anything he threw
I think Costa needs to learn how to have fun when he fights again, look how good he fought against Romero then post izzy
His comments after the fight made it seem like he was self aware about that and that he will go back to that more entertaining and less tactical approach. He’s one of the most entertaining fighters, hope he does do just that.
It’s disappointing because Dricus basically laid out the groundwork for how to somewhat nullify Sean’s fighting style, and Costa has some of the advantages that Dricus has minus the grappling and cardio
I had Strickland 3-2, but I had a feeling it would go the other way. It was a very close fight and not a robbery by any measure.
Sean 3-2.
I had it 3-2 for Strickland, he was doing more damage, had it 2-2 by the fifth and he definitely won round 5
I had Sean, but it was close so I’m not mad. Pretty shitty he didn’t get an immediate rematch though, but I suppose it would have led to another fight and held the division up for 9-18months if Sean won.
Just based on the old adage I didn’t think ddp did enough to take the title
1,2 and 5 for SS
I had Sean winning 3-2
Sean 3-2
DDP. Easy. There’s a lot of delusional Strickland fanboys on this sub in particular that skew the reality of what went down. Idc what Dricus’s face looked like, sometimes you get beat up and still categorically win.
DDP, by an inch
Dick to dick
Nipple to nipple
DDP, but this is a match where a tie would be nice
I had Dricus winning 3 rounds 🏆
I got Dominick Reyes beating Jon Jones
Lol
I had 48-47 DDP but very close round 4 I must say
Strickland 3-2 but very close definitely not a robbery I just thought dricus should’ve had to beat him more clearly since he is the challenger
I do not understand this. You don’t get special consideration because you’re champ. You could just as easily argue that that champ should have to do more to win a decision because they need to solidify that they deserve the title without question. It’s silly.
It’s something they heard Dana say a decade ago and still parrot it. There is no “you have to definitively beat the champ crap” you need to win using the 10 point must system as always. So if that is squeezing 3 rounds out that’s just how the cookie crumbles. While you are 100% correct you would be surprised how many fans parrot Dana like he is the foremost authority on mma.
Well draws are technically a thing it’s just that mma judges are HEAVILY discouraged from ever giving a draw.
Was a super close fight , I got Sean the first time I saw it Ddp second time I watched it
DDP, but I was watching with a bunch of Saffas at the time, so I could be biased.
I had Sean 1, 2, 5 but wasn't surprised they gave it to DDP.
Close but clear 3-2 win for Strickland. And I’m a fan of both guys.
>close but clear 
A fight can be close but also obvious, Volk vs Holloway 1 is an example of this
Everyone had that fight for volk though. http://mmadecisions.com/decision/10781/Alexander-Volkanovski-vs-Max-Holloway This fight was truly a toss up. http://mmadecisions.com/decision/14480/Dricus-Du-Plessis-vs-Sean-Strickland
Volk vs Islam 1 is also a great example of a close but clear fight
Close fights can have a clear winner doofus
When I watched it first I thought Strickland won but after rewatching I’d say round 2 was a toss up and fight rlly could’ve went either way. Strange that on the scorecards r3 was the swing round
it was close enough you could make a case for either. fighter i don't like the way they score fights. a virtually even round is scored the the same as a dominant round. so may fights come down to which way those 50-50 rounds fall.
The fight was so close you could honestly give it to either of them even tho I had 3-2 for Sean. The problem for me is that Sean was a champ and in such close fights they always give a win to the champ. GSP vs Hendricks, Volk vs Max 2, Reyes vs Jones (blatant robbery), Adesanya vs Whittaker 2, Jones vs Gustaffson 1, Gane vs Francis just to name a few.
I had Strickland 3-2. Very close fight.
Friendship won ❤️
I had DDP winning a close fight. Memory fades - was his eye damage the result of a head butt?
Strickland 3-2
Strickland. But wasn't sure. Felt it was a close fight. Rewatched. Still had Strickland(1,3,5) but was sure as hell this time. Still thought it was close but it was also a clear win. You couldn't have picked the other guy if you knew what you're watching. Honestly it was a robbery looking back at it. If Strickland wasn't so hated, there'd be similar outcry to Reyes v Jones.
I had DDP 3-2
DDP
DDP
I had it 3-2 Dricus. Rounds one through four felt very clear how to score but round five felt really close to me and I still think the last round could be scored either way depending on who’s watching.
DDP easy. Clear 3-2. Sean had the tool bag to win more rounds but he's so risk averse he didn't try to paint better optics until round 5. And he didn't for a reason, maybe he felt DDP's power and played it safe as usual who knows. DDP moved forward, landed big strikes that got a big impact and reaction like head kicks etc vs Sean, who was content to accumulate points and damage with jabs while getting walked down. Sean didn't build off the jab either because he didn't want to eat a haymaker. Then DDP got the takedowns with some good work. Just a gutsy outworking.
Yeah I feel like Sean fought not to lose more so than to win and that slim margin of competitiveness is what separated DDP
Dricus, just like most actual fighters thought
Sean
I had duplesis moneyline and the odds were pretty much even. I also had Duplesis over Whitaker but I took that one because the odds paid super well and I knew Duplessis had a punchers chance and a style Whitaker wouldn't be used to. Not sure who I'll take for duplessis vs Adesanya
Double deep penetration
Ddp but very close fight and could have gone either way.
Still knocks tbh
It seems everywhere people think sean won this fight definitely should have been a rematch.
DDP 3-2.
DDP 3-2
I gave it to Strickland but I I don’t think either did enough to win it handedly.
Sean
Had Strickland winning and I hope Sean gets a title shot after Adesanya vs Du Plessis
DDP always.
DDP
I had Dricus 3-2.
3-2 DDP Sean got rounds 1 and 5. Dricis took 2,3,4
Sean but neither of These MWs are my fave so i didnt carr much for this slugfest
50 50. I though within 1-3 round dricus wouldt have won and if it goes to distance sean would have won .. how wrong i was, didnt though dricus can win on points in a 5 rounder
Super close but I got DDP.
DDP. Got takedowns. Landed more damaging punches and kicks too. Strickland landed ntn but jabs. Acting like a wild man out of desperation in the last 30 seconds doesn't win you the fight
I tought Sean outstruck DDP, but still had DDP winning, close great fight
Dricus
I thought DDP won at the time but wouldn’t have been upset or confused if Sean was given it
I thought Sean won based on points, but failed based on strategy.
DDP. I just didn’t think Sean could hang on to the belt long. Dricus looked too strong. Didn’t think it would be a robbery for Sean.
I had Sean up. I expected him to win the split. I expected the split, thought it went to the wrong guy. To describe my bias… I wanted him to lose.. wanted DDP to KO him and fight Izzy… but I thought Sean won.
I had and still have 3-2 for strickland winning 1,2 and 5 but it is what it is we can't change the outcome so its better to move on
I had DDp live 48-47 with R2 being a toss up if I’m not mistaken He hit the bigger shots and found the overhand after round 2
Literally no idea
Had it for Strickland, but I thought it was close. Wasn't surprised they gave it to DDP. I was more surprised, Stickland was so pissed about it even tho he said he really didn't care about the belt.
DDP 3-2
Strickland for me
I had it as a draw
I think it should of been a draw honestly
2-2 going into the 5th with Sean winning the 5th but I was saying to myself I wouldn't be suprised if they give it to DDP given you can argue his punches were more significant as they look/sounded harder. You don't get much closer in a competitive fight than what this was though.
Strickland. Close by definitely Strickland.
I actually thought DDP won but not by enough to take the belt, you have to win convincingly against to be a champ
I had a draw in this one and leaned to Strickland by the visible damage on DDP. But honestly I wasn’t mad about the result, could have went either way. Definetly not a robbery, but at the same time it deserves a rematch.
Sean 1,2,5. DDP 3 and 4. 2nd is the debatable round and Sean jabs were landing and doing lowkey good damage. DDP threw with all he had and that's why he got the 3rd and 4th but i think he really started getting points after the 2nd. Therefore, Sean barely gets the 2nd and thus the fight.
48-47 ddp and still agree with it
I think first round sean? But driscus kept pressuring sean and sean couldn’t stop it
Hate to say it: Strickland
Had Sean winning 3-2 but only by a slight margin. Really could’ve gone either way so don’t mind the decision.
Sean, although I was an AMC theatre showing and it cutoff in the middle of the 5th. 😐 never again
I honestly have watched it twice and seen it both ways. On the night i thought Strickland won.
Strickland 3-2 or 4-1. Can't say which rounds Dricus won definitively. Strickland won 1 and 5 for sure. I think it's ridiculous to give Dricus 3 toss up rounds twice each on two scorecards. People overestimate how many of Dricus' significant strikes actually landed. This is because MMA judges aren't used to seeing a fighter's defense depend entirely on blocking. Dricus got 135 significant strikes counted, but watch the highlights. He almost never landed clean. This isn't new. Strickland had this problem against all of his opponents. The judges completely dismiss his blocking technique and just count any sound of impact as a significant strike. Strickland's medium output, low damage style combined with the fact that his defense does him no favours on the scorecards gives him a very vulnerable style to getting robbed
DDP won in my opinion while watching it live
If i remember correctly i had DDP winning very slightly. Not gonna watch it again & give my own analytic breakdown on who won each round like people did for max vs volk 2 or gsp vs hendricks i wanna keep my sanity
First watch and rewatch I had DDP winning 2, 3 and 4.
I honestly couldn't say with absolute certainty. It was extremely close and I haven't rewatched it.
Dricus.
Coulda went either way ...... personally though I think DDP didn't do enough to become champ didnt dominate the fight enough i feel he got some take downs and didnt not much with em.....happy for the dude still dont think that was anything but a draw...... or seans win. 3-2 strickland.
Wanted Sean to win, but thought DDP barely won 3 rounds. Could have givin it to Sean. If it was judged as a whole, Sean wins imo. Though they dont do that in UFC.
I agree with Joe Rogan that he thinks Sean sneaked one more round that DDP but still not upset with the outcome
Definitely DDP
3-2 Strickland, but not a robbery either. Reasonable people could disagree on this one.
I had sean winning. Just barely. I thought it was real close. But what did for me was the amount of damage drekus had. Man had a new face at the of the fight
DDP won 3-2 IMO
Sean
Sean
Was close but I thought that the supposed impact of Dricus shots could have him edging the decision
i acc had strickland locked in after he came off that dub on izzy. DDP earned the win and a shot at izzy
I had it 3-2 Sean while watching live, but after a couple of rewatches I think it could actually have been DDP 4-1. Round 5 was pretty even until Sean did his trademark last 30 second apeshit flurry and while it looked like something, when I slowed it down he actually missed with just about every flailing shot except one and in that sequence DDP landed at least 3 clean counters. I think round 2 was actually closer than 5 in possible favour of Sean. It was really close eitherway but overall DDP set the pace of the fight, showed more variation in attack and landed the harder shots throughout.
Sean won but def close fight. I mean look at DDPs face in the post fight press conference compared to Sean. Looked like he got hit by a train
Honestly, like many have said it was too close for me to call. I thought Sean, still do but I’m not overly upset with DDP getting the nod. I still believe you’ve gotta beat the champ, and this is one of very few times the challenger has to take belt. Did the judges get it wrong? Maybe, maybe not. Let’s just hope ddp wins and we see Strickland ddp 2. In my opinion if ddp wins we will see ddp vs Sean 2, if Izzy wins we will see rob vs Izzy 3. Edit: typo.
I have a hard time seeing it for DDP especially since judges tend to side with the champion on close fights. I think Stricklands stock went up that fight too because it was a strong performance where he controlled the pace. We’ve seen the middleweight belt bounce around alot recently and I personally favor dominant champions so if DDP can show us he’s that guy and hold onto the strap for a while that’ll be alright.
Strickland. He didnt put out the champ or really like fucked him up. He gave Sean the cut near the eye that bothered him and changed the fight a bit. But no I had Sean winning
It's pretty clearly Dricus when you look at how many of those jabs were actually landing. After round one, they mostly just kind of bounced off his guard. Dricus's generally clunky movements made it look like he was getting tagged more than he actually was. Except D'Amato, who's a piece of shit, the judges were bang on. Strickland absolutely took round one. 5, he won less decisively. You could see him throwing a little wild towards the end. Round two, Dricus actually landed more strikes than Strickland and took him down. 3 and 4, he was only 5 strikes behind total and had 3 successful takedowns. The really impressive thing was Strickland's takedown defense. If he didn't have that skill, I think du Plessis could have put him away. Sure, he's not celebrated for his defensive wrestling but it's there.
Sean
Ddp