Triple M Junkie Idol Game thread

bconcrete said:
I have a problem with cm's completely arbitrary addition to criteria.

We had to have an UNPOPULAR OPINION. Full stop. Not "an unpopular opinion about a popular topic." That's a completely different thing.

Plus he stopped reading my Lenny argument halfway through. This isnt "Uncle Phil isn't a father" level of failure, but we now have an established pattern of incompetence that I think we need to have a Junkies Quorom to determine if his judging license should be renewed.
Click to expand...
I didn't fully read the comments on my entry. Fuck them, they obviously didn't read my entry.
 
FunnyHoneyBunny said:
i heard that one fighter somewhere in siberia did not like the fight, so i would have judged this as a poor entry..
@thedarkwingduck2k11 can i be a judge next season?
I swear i make it as fair as possible (every gets fucked equally)
Click to expand...
I vote for this.

There aren't any German fighters worth a shit so I won't get fucked by nationalistic pride like this time.

Honestly, I get y'all are the Puerto Rico of Europe and all, but why would you even WANT to claim Lenny? HE is who you want as your representative?!?
 
bconcrete said:
I have a problem with cm's completely arbitrary addition to criteria.

We had to have an UNPOPULAR OPINION. Full stop. Not "an unpopular opinion about a popular topic." That's a completely different thing.

Plus he stopped reading my Lenny argument halfway through. This isnt "Uncle Phil isn't a father" level of failure, but we now have an established pattern of incompetence that I think we need to have a Junkies Quorom to determine if his judging license should be renewed.
Click to expand...
What you expect from a FALSE IDOL who was doing this while paying less than half attention while doing other work? I still think we should have moved on without his scores since he admitted he would do a poor job scoring.
 
Eranys said:
What you expect from a FALSE IDOL who was doing this while paying less than half attention while doing other work? I still think we should have moved on without his scores since he admitted he would do a poor job scoring.
Click to expand...
The only time that guy scores well is at an all-male dance.
 
ABB said:
Archimedes put another scalp in his satchel then sewed that bitch right back on your head, punk.
Click to expand...
You and Archimedes could have a lot in common if you like. You both built shit, and you could both end up being slain by an angry sergeant.
 
  • angry2
Reactions: ABB
bconcrete said:
I have a problem with cm's completely arbitrary addition to criteria.

We had to have an UNPOPULAR OPINION. Full stop. Not "an unpopular opinion about a popular topic." That's a completely different thing.

Plus he stopped reading my Lenny argument halfway through. This isnt "Uncle Phil isn't a father" level of failure, but we now have an established pattern of incompetence that I think we need to have a Junkies Quorom to determine if his judging license should be renewed.
Click to expand...
One of the criteria DWD gave us was "the strength of the MMA topic" and gave an example of a B.S. topic that would not score well.
 
thedarkwingduck2k11 said:
10. @Eranys
The Petr Yan / Sean O'Malley fight was not a robbery, and further, arguing that Sean won.
Ok, for my entry, you will want to watch the first round of Sean O'Malley vs Petr Yan. You will only need to watch up until 5:20
It is a widely held opinion that Yan was robbed in this fight, an opinion I do not share. The vast majority of media outlets scored this fight 29-28 Yan, as did an enormous portion of the fan base. As it is also almost universally agreed that Petr won round 2, and Sean won round 3, I am only going to put forth arguments for why O'Malley won the first round. Almost no one scored the fight 30-27 for either side, so we will only focus on the swing round for this entry. And it was a very close round, however one I believe O'Malley edged out according to the modern unified rules of MMA

The illusion of a Yan victory in this round relies on a cognitive bias: observers naturally weight the visual spectacle of a takedown heavily, even when it yields no results. Breaking down the official data and mechanics proves why O'Malley structurally won the opening frame.



MetricSean O'MalleyPetr Yan
Significant Strikes Landed23 / 5519 / 31
Striking Accuracy41%61%
Total Strikes Landed23 / 5528 / 41
Takedowns Landed0 / 11 / 3
Control Time0:021:10

On the feet, O'Malley out landed Yan in both quantity and quality. He established a sharp jab and landed the cleanest, heaviest single shots of the round, specifically a straight left and an overhand right that visibly disrupted Yan’s forward momentum. Significant strikes of note at 3:51 left in the round, and another at 3:16 left in the round. These were clearly the most impactful strikes in a very close round. Sean also lit up Yan through his guard multiple times. O'Malley didn't just throw range finding jabs; he used his length to land heavy, snapping jabs that repeatedly pushed Yan's head back. He mixed these with front kicks up the middle to intercept Yan's forward pressure.

The argument for Yan winning the round relies on scoring highly his takedowns that resulted in zero damage. Yan secured a takedown and accumulated roughly a minute of ground control. However, under the Unified Rules, takedowns without damage or submission attempts are essentially valued at zero. O'Malley remained active off his back, offering submissions and scrambles, meaning Yan's control time did not produce the "effective grappling" required to override O’Malley’s superior striking damage.

MMA is a prize fight, not a wrestling match. Judges Ben Cartlidge and David Lethaby correctly scored UFC 280 for Sean O'Malley because they adhered strictly to the Unified Rules: they prioritized the blood drawn and impact made by O'Malley's striking in Rounds 1 and 3 over the passive, damage-free control time offered by Petr Yan. Critics who scored the first round for Petr Yan are operating under outdated pride-era metrics that valued the mere act of a takedown over everything else. Under the modern Unified Rules, Sean O'Malley won Round 1 because 23 significant, distance-resetting strikes outweigh a singular slam that resulted in zero damage, zero submissions, and zero meaningful positional advancement.

ADDENDUM
I'm adding this addendum ONLY if you disagree about Sean winning round 3, which is not a common opinion at all. You only need to read the following if you think Petr won round 3.

O’Malley completely took over the striking narratives in the third round, doubling Yan's volume and landing devastating head strikes. The defining moment of the fight was a brutal knee from O'Malley that opened a massive, leaking laceration near Yan's eye. Yan was visibly compromised and spent the rest of the round fighting through his own blood.

Desperate to slow the damage, Yan secured two more takedowns late in the round. But just like Round 1, he could do nothing with them. O'Malley popped right back up to his feet and continued the striking assault. Because the rulebook prioritizes "immediate or cumulative impact" over positional control, O'Malley's damage easily secured him the round.
webble: I don’t have a strong view on this either way and didn’t at the time, partly because I am not a big fan of either fighter. I think the writer put forward a strong argument and I think that ultimately it was very close. What needs to be taken into account when rewatching today is that this fight was a couple of years ago when the criteria did focus slightly more on the wrestling, add to that that not a huge amount of damage was done on either side and I don’t think it was a robbery whichever way you scored it. I watched twice with and without the sound and thought Yan edged it but good arguments made 6/10
GoodCat: I'm on board with this one, probably a little bit due to me being an O'Malley fan. But I tried to not let that bias get in the way on this submission. But I do kind of put this fight in the same category as the Bones vs Gustaffson fight. Everybody and their momma knew (thought) that Gus won, including me at the time. But when you really broke down the numbers, you could see exactly where the judges scored it overall for Jones. Now one thing I'm gonna ding you for, is that you said Sean won the striking in quality AND quantity, but your own stats show that Yan landed more total strikes at 28 to 23, unless that was a typo. Still not enough to derail the argument, but I have to take off .5 due to it. 7.5/10
Brick: I don’t think enough people are on the “robbery” side to really classify your opinion as super unpopular. I mean, it was a very, very close round that could have gone either way, so most people just blindly line up behind their guy. But this isn’t Park beating Roy Jones Jr. at the ’88 Seoul Olympics or anything. Even your metrics weren’t particularly compelling in O’Malley’s favor. But to your point, media sure did seem to be lining up against O’Malley, so that helps you quite a bit. We’ll go 6.5/10.
cmvideo75: Eh... another one about a specific fight. It may have been debated at the time but it quickly has blown over which is the problem with arguing about specific fights. I want to hear about real popular opinions. No one talks about this now which makes the popularity of this opinion debatable. The OP gave a pretty good argument for it but it's not not registering that high on the 'I care' meter for me. 4/10
Total:24
Click to expand...
I've been anxiously waiting for @Xamot to read my entry and have his head explode
 
Brick said:
One of the criteria DWD gave us was "the strength of the MMA topic" and gave an example of a B.S. topic that would not score well.
Click to expand...
must be nice to be able to just follow the rules you like.

pfffft...Mail in judging.

SAVE AMERICA!
 
bconcrete said:
You didn't kidnap Bucky to Alaska.
Click to expand...
giphy.gif
 
Eranys said:
You and Archimedes could have a lot in common if you like. You both built shit, and you could both end up being slain by an angry sergeant.
Click to expand...
go disconnect a high voltage power line, asshole!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top