A ***** in the armour?

So did anyone else hear what Rogan was talking about as Kampmann walked out? He was talking about how Kampmann has received losts to some people because he didn't follow the game plan at all. For instance when he fought Paul Daley he decided to stand and bang and got knocked out. When he fought Jake Shields he went to ground and tried to submit him. Now I am not saying that Kampmann is not a great fighter because he is and he's so well rounded which is why he could have won those two fights if he had stuck to the gameplan! if he had taken daley to the ground and stood more with shields they would have been different outcomes in my opinion. But I think he reads about the hype around his opponents and decides that he can take them in their strong point it's just outright unfortunate because he's so much better than he's showed. Now tonight he just got outworked but I want to highlight something, he at least stuck to his gameplan, and he put on a clinic on how to stuff the takedown that was just outright beautiful to behold until that final minute or so. That was just Sanchezs will to win that got him that takedown.

I can see the argument for either guy winning either way. I know when I was watching it I gave Kampmann a clear rd 1 and edged Diego out in rds 2 and 3.  I thought the striking was almost even in rds 2 and 3 (rd 2 Kampmann landed more but Diego was more effective) therefor we revert to the other categories for the victor and Diego was the aggressor, and he controlled the octagon. Diego controlled the center, forced Kampmann back, Forcing Kampmann against the cage, Kampmann just defeneded TDs but did so while moving backwards so he was not controlling the fight. For Aggression Diego moved forward constantly throwing and landing big punches, He was attempting TDs and driving Kampmann back. Kampmann faultered in playing a defensive game and trying to counter punch the whole time. 

I dunno why people think Diego's striking was so much more effective.  The only time he even landed any decent shots was during his reckless, short flurries which there were only a few of.  Diego's got one of the best chins in MMA so he can afford to be reckless like that, Kampmann can't.  Aside from those flurries he had nothing and Kampmann dictated the pace for over 90% of the fight regardless of how much Diego was moving forward.  Diego moves forward so much because he just eats shots on the way in and apparently a lot of people think that's aggressive or effective and should count for big points.  A lot of Diego's aggression to me just looked like him desperately wanting to get the fight to the ground.

Kampmann landed more shots and he did a lot more damage and if anyone wants to dispute that they're clearly biased because Sanchez's face was the worst I've ever seen after an MMA fight and yes that is DAMAGE.  In fact that was easily enough to end the fight.  Kampmann's striking was way more precise and effective, Sanchez's was reckless and came in short flurries.  One of Kampmann's knees buckled for half a second during one of Diego's flurries which apparently is why Diego was more "effective".

I love fightmetric.com. Even when you think you know what you saw, sometimes it turns out completely different. And sometimes it validates exactly what you think you saw...

http://blog.fightmetric.com/2011/03/sanchez-vs-kampmann-official-ufc.html

I thought Kapmann won. He clearly out struck Sanchez, and going 1 for 12 on takedowns is not what I would call "effective grappling". In fairness, part of the judging criteria is "Aggression" and "Octagon control". I would say Sanchez was more aggressive. It doesn't really matter in the end, the decision is the decision. And as of late I have been very disappointed with the judges. You can scream "don't leave it in the hands of the judges" all you want, but sometimes you have to. I think clearly defining the allocation of the judging criteria (ie, effective striking = 30%, effective grappling = 30%, aggression - 20%, octagon control = 20%) would help fighters with their game plan, (especially when you realize at the end of round 2 that you’re going to be putting someone away then the fighter can adapt) I should make a pie chart, but frankly, the flaws in this would be exposed in a situation like the Kampmann-Sanchez fight where the majority of the fight was striking, which Kampmann won, and grappling was comprised of 1 take down, which Sanchez won. Should grappling and striking then be counted as equal parts, and why are we not judging on defensive grappling. It’s still grappling. You go 1/12 stuffing takedowns, I’d say you’re winning the grappling contest…now I’m rambling.

Yeah I think the guy just lets adrenaline get a hold of him. He started out great but Sanchez being indestructible threw him off.

For all those crying about Kampmann's losses.. he lost both fights.

The Diego fight is entirely his own fault for not pushing the action when Diego quite literally was a poke away from being knocked out. He did all the damage on the first round and allowed Diego to put back him up against the fence and land shots to the body.

He didn't even break his hand, he bruised it.

Nice call Tacoma. I like that, but that means you value aggression over everything else, because for sure after the flurries you could see that kampmann was not as aggressive as he was before said flurries, hence why in my opinion diego didn't need to have so many of them in this fight. In fact I bet if he had done flurries of punches in every round including round one kampmann would have thrown and landed a lot less because these things took him out of his gameplan for sure. Also Big J thanks for clarification of rules that was something that needed to be clarified for sure.

I disagree with stuffing takedowns not controlling the fight. Buddy wants to take you to the mat, and you stuff it, you've kept the fight were you want it, controlling the fight.  
Bigj, I get what you are saying about how judges don't score for defensive moves, only offense. But I think there should be some sort of penalty when your offense is failing.  I said it before, Diego landed 1 takedown, but attempted 15.  That's 6.7% accurary, not a very good job controlling the fight, IMO.  But he got the W, so I guess congrats.

You have to take into account the way the ufc scores fights.

You don't get points for stuffing takedowns and under the current scoring system Diego won under that scoring system.

And I just wanted Kampmann to finnish. He really pissed me off for not going after the it seeing to how badly Diego was hurt. But he seemed content to just coast to a decision vicory.

No I know how the UFC scoring system works, I just strongly disagree with that aspect. I think points should be given to the fighter for stuffing takedowns.  I really dislike how blind aggression is enough to win fights. This is more that I hate the UFC scoring then Im mad about who won or lost.  Dana White said there were no losers in that fight, lol

I wouldn't have called Diego's agression blind. When he moved forward he did a good job of landing the strikes when Kampmann backed up.

And I think the ufc needs to drop points by round to be honest and judge the entire fight. I don't disagree the scoring system needs to be changed in one way or another, but under the current system I cannot see how Diego did not win.

It's easy to stuff a TD if that's all you're waiting to do. You sit there low backing up keeping distance waiting for it to come. If you are moving forward landing punches and the guy shoots in and you stuff continuing to move forward and land strikes then you are controlling the fight. Preventing someone's offense isn't controlling anything. 

Just because you block a TD doesn't necessarily you have the fight where you want it, and that you are controlling the action. You may just not want to be on your back but you may wan't to be on top on the ground, but since you are the one being pressed you can't shoot yourself. Just because an opponent shoots in it doesn't necessarily mean he wants to play the ground game. I've seen plenty of opponents shoot get a TD and let their opponent back up a few seconds later.  Often fighters shoot and press to get their opponent to be aware of the shot to freeze up their opponents striking and stop them from moving forward. So even a failed shot can have a beneficial outcome. You do some shots that fail and then fake and throw a right you can end up knocking out your opponent. 

In order to control the fight you have to be controlling the offense and attack. If your opponents actions are dictating your actions then you are not controlling the fight. Keep in mind control is a low criteria behind effective striking and grappling. 

BigJ Great post.

What a great fight! Personally I scored it a 29-29 draw. I think that second round was a 10-10 round. Both guys landed effectively and Kampmann landed the cleaner shots, Diego landed the harder shots, rocking Martin. The third round Diego landed some more huge bombs and got a takedown. I really like watching both these guys scrap!

Fair enough BigJ, you definatly have some good points there.  I even rewatched the fight after reading your scoring breakdown, and by the current UFC scoring system Diego won, I know that, I saw him be his hand raised.  I also realize that I can't change the UFC scoring system by *****ing about it on the tapology forums, so I'm going to drop it. But I think we can all agree a rematch is most certainly fight we'd want to watch, and is hopefully in the works..

A rematch would make me incredibly happy. Either that or i want to see Kampmann vs Alves, Maybe Dan Hardy

I wouldn't mind seeing the fight rematched at all. 

If phan- garcia can get a rematch, id be even more happy with a rematch between sanchez and kampmann.

That fight was a blatant robbery. Yes I want Nam Phan to get his rightful win.

So stoked for the Phan v Garcia II, going to be a war, again.  But I still really want the Kampmann v Sanchez rematch too.  

@lilspyder Cheers pal...