I'm going to amend what I said earlier:

Are people still crying over this? Jesus christ, get over it, there's going to be a rematch, which will prove once and for all that Rua does not have what it takes to be champ, and that the judge's decision (unanimous by the way) was justified.

I think this video is in response to Cecil Peoples comment the other day. This video shows that Shogun wasn't getting hit harder like Peoples is saying.

Here is the full article.

http://mmabay.co.uk/Story%2003245.html

In order to be the champ you've gotta beat the champ, decisively. Cant let judges decide.

Well if that's the case, in order to be considered a real champ you have to defend your belt decisively....

Too bad for all the people on Rua's **** it takes more to become champ than to retain the belt, hence, why Machida won.

thats just bull****, a title fight has the same criteria as any other fight and should NOT be judged any different than any other.
and about rua´s ****, i had bet money on machida and really thought and wanted him to win so im not in any way a shogun fanboy, but i still say that decision was ****.

It IS judged differently, because a title fight is a special occasion. I'm going to give you an analogy to help you understand:

The champion is like someone sitting on top of a mountain, the challenger, like someone whose come to knock that person off the top of the mountain so that they can sit there themselves. Naturally, it is rather easy for the person on top to just push back or knock down the person climbing to the top, however, it is very difficult for the challenger, because not only do they have to reach the summit, but they must also fight off someone who is trying to keep them from reaching it.

You have to understand, it takes more effort to become champion than it does to defend the belt; no matter the champion or challenger, it is a far greater travesty to take the belt away from the champ in a controversial decision, than to let him retain it in a controversial decision and have a rematch.

This decision would have been controversial going either way, this way, we get a rematch.

So, using this theory, if you could please break down the Forrest Griffin/Rampage Jackson title fight for me. Cause not only did Forrest not beat the champ decisively, he didnt even win the fight in my mind and the minds of many others.

So, using this theory, if you could please break down the Forrest Griffin/Rampage Jackson title fight for me. Cause not only did Forrest not beat the champ decisively, he didnt even win the fight in my mind and the minds of many others.

I never saw the Forrest/rampage fight, so I cannot comment on that, but I think we all know the UFC has handed Forrest some stuff.

Maybe that's why Rampage and Dana had a falling out, but again, I didn't see it so I don't know.