Lawler vs Condit

What a fight, but what a result! Who like me feels that Condit should have taken the belt? I can't understand why a fighter can dominate 3 clear rounds and had a shout of at least 1 shared round to only lose the last round and still lose the fight! I have seen a few fights now where there's a controversial winner. It's like the underdog needs to win it by knockout to walk away with the win.

Loved the fight, draws you in like nothing else in the last round, shouting at the TV hoping the fighter you back makes it through when they are swinging for dear life! Just leaves you gutted when results seem a bit iffy! Always talk of a rematch as if that'll stop the questioning of the result!

yeh felt like condit should of won, and yes there was a fight I saw cant remember who, but that was a contraversal win even the comintators were shocked and couldn't belive the other won

I had Lawler to be honest although one round was very tight.

Amazing fight though

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

I thought the rounds were won quite clearly with Condit winning 1, 3 and 4; compared to Lawler's 2 and 5. That's basing it on effective striking, effective grappling, aggression, and octagon control. Credit to both fighters, with Condit constant attacking and Lawler's countering and power. Thought he'd win by k/o in the last round if he was to keep his belt.