The recently released FightMetric stats for the co-main event bout served only to boost some opinions that the wrong hand was raised on Saturday night.
Hendricks, who is known for his aggressive fighting style and devastating knockout power, stayed true to his form and opened the fight up early with a salvo of haymakers. On his heels, Condit proved why he has one of the division's sturdiest beards by absorbing punishment in the pocket and countering effectively.
It didn't take long before the trigger-happy Hendricks flipped on the wrestling switch and began working for takedowns. Condit is arguably the best all-around striker in the entire welterweight division, and Hendricks was keen enough in deciphering the best times to abandon the stand-up.
According to FightMetric, Hendricks secured 12 out of 15 total takedowns. The stats never lie, but things aren't always what they seem on paper. Despite all of his successful takedown attempts, Hendricks was never able to mount any form of offense on the ground.
Quite the contrary, the ground battle consisted of Hendricks controlling from the top and Condit landing the majority of strikes from bottom or scrambling back to his feet.
The total margin of strikes for the fight gives Condit an edge in both total strikes and significant strikes landed.
How could Condit possibly lose a fight that he landed more strikes in?
The answer is so obvious it burns longtime fans of the sport. In the eyes of the judges, the guy on top is always winning. The sport hasn't come along far enough where casual eyes understand the guy on bottom is also in an offensive position.
Can you imagine if MMA-style judging was implemented in Jiu-Jitsu competitions, where competitors often fight to pull guard?
As the sport continues to grow and more educated judges come along, a takedown and elongated minutes of top control may no longer be enough to win a fight. With that said, wrestling is a major aspect in MMA.
If you can't stuff takedowns, you may want to find another sport.