Just watched the fight for the first time. Only read reviews last night.
Here's my round by round scoring..
1-diaz
2-diaz
3-?? very close round i wouldn't be against a 10-10
4-condit
5-diaz, got full back mount and was the only significant advantage anyone had in that round
Bart, you're missing the boat here. It's not about how many strikes you land. We can go find a lot of fights where the guy who landed more strikes lost. Sayyyyyyyyyyyy Jake Shields vs GSP? Shields landed more strikes, but lost. That pretty much throws your argument right out of the window.
Octagon control? Pressing the pace? Condit didn't fight. He ran the entire fight. Also, try watching the fight, not listening to it. Turn the volume on mute so you don't have to listen to 2 retards comment a fight. What they say isn't always true or accurate.
You realize that your ultimate bias against kickserv and GSp taint your viewpoint here, right? Please just own up to that. I have looked almost everywhere, and all the online experts (except one that I saw score the fight 48-47 Diaz) score the fight as a Condit victory, including Dana White. And you know Dana wanted Diaz to win. The take at GSP-Diaz would have been HUGE! And Dana isn't exactly afraid to say exactly what he feels, right?
I wasnt pinning my sole reason that Condit won on strikes. Obviously strikes don't tell the whole story....but they certainly tell some of it. I do give Diaz 2 rounds. He decidedly won round 2. But 48-47 Condit is most likely the mean score out of most people that unbiasedly watched this fight.
Condit simply wouldnt take the bait that Diaz wanted him to take. And why should he? Why should Condit say, "ok...I'll come fight the fight that Diaz wants me to." Bottom line is Diaz got frustrated. If he won the first 2 rounds like you say he did (and I won't argue that he did), then why wasn't Diaz smart enough to make Condit come to him at that point? Instead, he let Condit continue his gameplan and wear Nick out.
