In a short answer: No. It's amazing that people are clamoring for Nick Diaz to jump over Carlos Condit again to fight Georges St. Pierre for the title. What would justify Diaz fighting GSP?
Immediately following the fight Twitter exploded with polarizing views on how Diaz won the fight and that Carlos Condit was running.
This simply isn't true. Carlos Condit stuck to his gameplan.
Think about the logic on this one. Nick Diaz has amazing cardio and some of the best boxing in the sport. Which means that he won't tire from punching and he punches very accurately.
With that knowledge, why would you stand in front of him? The best thing to do is to counter-attack and stay on the move. That's exactly what Condit did. He wasn't running, he was evading the attacks then setting up attacks of his own.
That's not running; that's smart.
Who in their right mind would stand with their back against the cage and try to out-box Nick Diaz?
Oh wait, I know who, Paul Daley and BJ Penn would. Guess what they got for their efforts—a messed up face and retirement. Carlos Condit knew that would be an automatic loss, so he used diverse striking and his great cardio to keep Diaz off his game.
Lots of people were also saying that Diaz dictated the pace by continuously moving forward whereas Condit was retreating so he should have won those rounds. Why? Things would've been different if Condit wasn't counter-striking, then that would've definitely been running.
According to Fightmetric.com, Carlos Condit landed more significant strikes at a rate of 151 to 105. A lot of them were leg kicks, but, last time I checked, leg kicks count as strikes.
Point blank, Diaz didn't do enough to win the fight and Condit did. Diaz should've been more aggressive instead of talking and trying to get into Condit's head.