Outpoll | Cory Sandhagen discredits Merab Dvalishvili's 20 takedowns as 'gamey way to win'

News
AI
Cory Sandhagen discredits Merab Dvalishvili's 20 takedowns as 'gamey way to win'

Cory Sandhagen discredits Merab Dvalishvili's 20 takedowns as 'gamey way to win'

1 day ago7 min read8 comments

Alright, let's break this down like we're sitting courtside at a playoff game, because what went down between Cory Sandhagen and Merab Dvalishvili at UFC 320 is the MMA equivalent of a team winning on free throws without ever taking a real shot. Sandhagen, sitting at 18-6 after this fight, isn't just salty about losing a unanimous decision; he's calling out what he sees as a fundamentally 'gamey' approach to scoring that, frankly, had me raising an eyebrow too.Picture this: Merab, aka 'The Machine,' goes for a staggering 47 takedowns—yeah, you read that right, forty-seven—and lands 20 of them, just one shy of Khabib Nurmagomedov's legendary record. On paper, that sounds like a wrestling clinic, the kind of stat that gets you hyped for a dominant performance.But Sandhagen's argument, laid out on 'The Ariel Helwani Show,' is that the numbers are kinda misleading, like counting a bunch of layups that barely graze the rim as points. 'What's a takedown without any control?' he asks, and honestly, it's a fair point.He describes most of those takedowns as mere 'mat returns'—bumping him to his knees without the slam-dunk impact you'd expect in a fight. 'It's not like he was picking me up and slamming me,' Sandhagen notes, adding that while it might score in pure wrestling, in MMA, where damage matters, it feels hollow, like a basketball player racking up assists without ever threatening the hoop.This isn't just Sandhagen being a sore loser; it's a deeper critique of how we judge fights, reminiscent of debates in other sports, like when a boxer wins on jabs alone without landing power punches. What makes this even more intriguing is the context: Sandhagen admits Merab had him 'badly hurt' on the feet in Round 2, a moment that could've shifted the fight's narrative entirely, but instead, Merab doubled down on that body-lock grip, what Sandhagen calls the 'S' grip, which he says is great for holding on but not for doing real damage.'I was really surprised he was so adamant about staying on those body locks,' Sandhagen admits, contrasting it with Merab's past fights where he'd mix in strikes. Here, it was all about milking the clock, a strategy that Sandhagen labels as 'gamey'—a term that's got the MMA community buzzing, much like how fans debate a team playing for fouls instead of open shots.Think about it: in the NBA, you've got teams like the Houston Rockets under Mike D'Antoni, who leveraged analytics to shoot threes and free throws, but critics argued it stripped the game of its artistry. Similarly, Merab's approach, while effective under the Unified Rules of MMA, raises questions about the spirit of competition.Is winning by volume takedowns, without follow-up control or damage, akin to a 'participation trophy' in a sport built on finishing fights? Sandhagen's frustration echoes broader conversations in combat sports history, like when Georges St-Pierre's strategic decisions were debated, or in boxing, where Floyd Mayweather's defensive mastery was both praised and criticized for being 'boring. ' From a technical standpoint, Sandhagen highlights the sheer effort disparity: 'It's way harder to hold someone down and continue to mat return someone than it is to continue to get up,' he says, implying that Merab's energy output might not have been as efficient as it seemed.But let's not forget, Merab is 21-4 and on a tear, and his style has proven successful, much like a grind-it-out team in sports that wins ugly but wins consistently. However, Sandhagen's comments tap into a growing sentiment among fans and analysts who crave action over attrition.If this becomes a blueprint for future fights, could we see more fighters prioritizing point-scoring over finishes, potentially diluting the excitement that draws viewers? It's a risk, and one that promotions like the UFC might need to address, perhaps by tweaking scoring criteria to emphasize control time or damage more heavily. In the end, Sandhagen isn't just discrediting Merab's win; he's sparking a necessary conversation about what makes a fight truly impressive, and as a fan, I'm here for it—because in sports, whether it's the Octagon or the hardwood, the best debates are the ones that make us rethink the rules of the game.