UnderGround Forums
 

UnderGround Forums >> Quebec gives its BS statement re: the GSP weighin


3/26/13 5:48 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Curtis_E_Bare
245 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 6/3/09
Posts: 44
Anderson's BBC in my Goku - 
Curtis_E_Bare - 
Anderson's BBC in my Goku - 
Curtis_E_Bare - 
Anderson's BBC in my Goku - 

"How do they determine the weight of the fighters? By whatever scale the commission uses."

Except that it's:
How do they determine the weight of the fighters? By whatever method the commission uses.

You seem to not have a very good understanding of metrology."

 

1st of all. i pretty clearly stated that if the commision has a specific rule, then that would supercede.show me the rule. show it to me.

 

second, yes, I have no clue what metrology is. so?lol


In short (with respect to fighter's weights) just because a scale reads 170.1 doesn't mean that the person weighs 170.1, they could weigh 170.0, 170.2 or they could be even greater amounts off depending on the precision and accuracy of the scale. This is why most ACs have a 1 pound tolerance for non-title fights. Personally, I think all fights should have the 1 pound allowance, just because it's a title fight doesn't mean the scale now works better.
I would imagine that Quebec's cutoff at the one pound mark is to reduce the chances of error in recording fighter's weights. If you measure and report to the nearest 0.1 pound their is significant uncertainty in that last decimal place, but if you you measure to the nearest 0.1 pound and report to the nearest pound, you reduce the uncertainty significantly.

ummm if they are using a scale that goes to decimals, they should be able to rely on those decimals...by your logic, we can throw out the single digit as well, since it may not be accurate...just let them weigh in anywhere between 170-179

 

and AGAIN...if the Quebec commission has a separate rule that allows for .9 lbs or disregards decimals....FINE...but you HAVE to have that in the code...you can't NOT mention it to a fighter (like they didnt mention it to condit) or tell a fighter AT the weighin (like they did to diaz)...THAT is horseshit..if you want to have an exception, put it in writing for all to see


"ummm if they are using a scale that goes to decimals, they should be able to rely on those decimals"

That's not how measuring devices work. The last decimal place is never certain, ever. The degree to which the uncertainty varies depends on the instrument (scale) and calibration. For any measured value there is always uncertainty. It is impossible to not have it. Here is some more reading on the subject, although it goes into much more detail than is probably needed here.

http://physics.nist.gov/cuu/Uncertainty/

If you measure to the nearest 0.1 pound (with a working and calibrated scale) than you have much more certainty reporting to the nearest pound.

If fighter X weighs in at 170.1 pound does he weight exactly 170.1 pound? No, of course not. But if you choose to report the value as 170 pounds now you have pretty good confidence that, to the nearest pound, the weight is 170.

1) i clicked that link but didnt see this universal law that says the last decimal place on the scale is never reliable. please show me the rule

2) are you positive the scales used by the athletic commission only goes to one decimal?

3) even if we were to assume that the decimal point is unreliable to the point it should be thrown out, shouldnt u at least round up 170.9 to 171? or is the last decimal unreliable with a bias towards going over the actual weight of whatever is being measured?


1) The entire article is about how measured values are uncertain. It's not just the last decimal place, uncertainty is not binary. The example listed is "Example 1
ms = 100.021 47 g with a combined standard uncertainty (i.e., estimated standard deviation) of uc = 0.35 mg." Despite not seeing it on this website it doesn't change the fact that measured values have inherent uncertainty. This is a fact of life. Cut a random length of string and ask 10 people to measure the length 10 times each, measure it to the nearest mm or 1/32 inch. Done correctly, every measurement will not be the same.

2) Certain, no but the little I've seen do. Regardless, uncertainty isn't limited to just the last decimal place, see the example above. The one pound allowance that most ACs give for non-title fights suggest the uncertainty in the 0.1 position is significant.

3) There are a few ways to deal with uncertainty. One is to just ignore the last decimal place (like the Quebec AC does.) A better method would be to round as you indicated. The best method (in terms of accuracy and precision) would be to take a number of weight measurements (> 5) and calculate a standard deviation. If the scale went to 0.1 pound the weight would be reported something like 170.1 ± 0.2 lbs. Although this would be overkill for weigh ins and not nearly as fan friendly.
3/26/13 5:54 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Curtis_E_Bare
245 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 6/3/09
Posts: 45
Anderson's BBC in my Goku - 
Curtis_E_Bare - Actually, this is probably more applicable here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Significant_figures

k...where does it say you should disregard the last digit of any scale because its unreliable?


Just to clarify further, it doesn't say you have to disregard the last digit. It just says that the measurement is uncertain, this is especially true with the last decimal place. How one deals with the certainty is a matter of practice. One method, and not the best one, is to ignore the last decimal place (see point 3 above.)
3/26/13 5:59 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Dougie
1109 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 8/20/03
Posts: 101667

Maybe if Diaz or his people actually showed up to some of the pre-fight events and meetings this would have not been an issue.

3/26/13 6:07 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Anderson's BBC in my Goku
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 8/6/08
Posts: 23378
Curtis_E_Bare - 
Anderson's BBC in my Goku - 
Curtis_E_Bare - Actually, this is probably more applicable here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Significant_figures

k...where does it say you should disregard the last digit of any scale because its unreliable?


Just to clarify further, it doesn't say you have to disregard the last digit. It just says that the measurement is uncertain, this is especially true with the last decimal place. How one deals with the certainty is a matter of practice. One method, and not the best one, is to ignore the last decimal place (see point 3 above.)

ok..but just because there is some level of uncertainty it doesnt logically follow that you must disregard the last digit, which is what we are talking about

3/26/13 6:08 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Anderson's BBC in my Goku
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 8/6/08
Posts: 23379
Dougie - 

Maybe if Diaz or his people actually showed up to some of the pre-fight events and meetings this would have not been an issue.


so they were going to tell him during his pre-fight workout?

3/26/13 6:11 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Anderson's BBC in my Goku
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 8/6/08
Posts: 23380
EvilGumby - I cornered a fighter for a title fight in a non-UFC regional promotion in Canada back in 2008 and back then the 170.X rule was in place. It was a in fact a welter weight title fight in that promotion and our opponent came in heavy (we came in at 169 if I remember correctly).

I argued long and loud both for a purse percentage as well as for our opponent to have to cut to 170.0. He was allowed to cut to 170.9 and allowed the fight with no penalties (as a title fight). Ultimately I sat down at the weigh-ins with both the commission as well as their lawyer and was told that 170.X was 170 and that was the way it was going to be. "The commission had spoken, case closed, etc."

This was at the Max Bell Center in Calgary, Alberta in 2008. Promotion was not UFC but it was the Canadian commission and this was their policy back then.

 

i dont know, but i think quebec and calgary are two different places....

 

 

here is more relevant experience...

 

  1. I've ran over 60 weigh-ins with them and the decimal always counted. Watch videos, they announce the decimals every time...

  2. I worked with the Quebec commission for over 12 years and this "decimal not counting" explanation is BS...

 
3/26/13 6:12 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
jcblass
36 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 9/8/02
Posts: 6651
.09 makes the fight shady? Diaz has a history of whining and playing the role of a victim. He is a hood rat street kid who learned to fight. He blew all his money, doesn't pay taxes, is a horrible employee and does the absolute bare minimum. He is merely looking at this as a way of shaking the UFC out of a few thousand dollars so he can chill with his boys in Stockton.

3/26/13 6:58 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
orcus
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 8/1/03
Posts: 76894
Anderson's BBC in my Goku - 
orcus - 
Anderson's BBC in my Goku - 

what do they mean question of interpretation?

170.1 is greater than the maximum of 170. And even if you wanted to give them the benefit of the doubt, at a minimum you would round to the nearest whole.


What don't you get about "our regulation on combat sports does not take decimals into account"?

He's saying as far as their regulations are concerned, 170.9 is 170. If the two fighters are concerned about decimals, that's their problem.


show me in their regulations where it says that decimals arent counted...

 

...im waiting...


If the guy was lying about that, that's another story, and one that should be easy to prove.

But what does that have to do with what he said being pretty clear? You're acting like they're obligated to round to the nearest whole or whatever; says who? You?

If their regulations say drop the decimal then that's the way it is. Any issues with that and what their UFC contracts say are between Nick, GSP, and Zuffa.

3/26/13 7:00 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
clockwork655321
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 11/13/10
Posts: 202
Here is the video from the Condit GSP weigh in. No decimals are counted on the entire card.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dEgrsLy25yY
3/26/13 7:01 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
orcus
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 8/1/03
Posts: 76895

Also, I haven't read the 9000 crybaby posts about this incident, but is there actually any reason to think GSP was over in the first place? I.e. just because the AC guy told Nick about their "drop the decimal" rule, is there anything that suggests GSP was 170.1 or greater?

3/26/13 7:01 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
ShowtimeWreckedMyLeever
46 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 8/24/11
Posts: 2777
Anderson's BBC in my Goku -
nineohfive - Who cares?

Diaz fans will dig for anything. It's funny they can't just listen to him talk after the fight and laugh.

-missed open workouts, got in late. every other fighter from the States made it, but not nick's fault.
-slept till 8pm. wasn't awake yet.
-had no help in training
-felt flat out there, lost 5 rounds but is ready to go now
-gsp's wraps were loaded
-we were lied to about the scale
-gsp hits like a girl, he wants a rematch (2 fight losing streak)

this isnt about nick..its about a potential abusive practice that is being used to favor one fighter over another.

Can you explain to me how this favors one fighter more tgan yge other? The rules apply to both of them.... Phone Post
3/26/13 7:01 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Bucephalus
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 10/22/12
Posts: 4002
It's simple math. .9 = 0

DUH.
3/26/13 7:07 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Anderson's BBC in my Goku
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 8/6/08
Posts: 23383
orcus - 
Anderson's BBC in my Goku - 
orcus - 
Anderson's BBC in my Goku - 

what do they mean question of interpretation?

170.1 is greater than the maximum of 170. And even if you wanted to give them the benefit of the doubt, at a minimum you would round to the nearest whole.


What don't you get about "our regulation on combat sports does not take decimals into account"?

He's saying as far as their regulations are concerned, 170.9 is 170. If the two fighters are concerned about decimals, that's their problem.


show me in their regulations where it says that decimals arent counted...

 

...im waiting...


If the guy was lying about that, that's another story, and one that should be easy to prove.

But what does that have to do with what he said being pretty clear? You're acting like they're obligated to round to the nearest whole or whatever; says who? You?

If their regulations say drop the decimal then that's the way it is. Any issues with that and what their UFC contracts say are between Nick, GSP, and Zuffa.


noone is saying they need to round to the nearest number.  im fine if their regulations say decimals are dropped, but show me the regs that say that. you can't because the regs dont say that. you cant have a BS "off-the-record" reg that you dont tell certain fighters about (condit) and only tell other fighters above on the day of the weighins (diaz).

 

absent any such regulations, you rely on the contract, which says the max amount is 170. 170.1 is more than 170.

3/26/13 7:08 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Anderson's BBC in my Goku
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 8/6/08
Posts: 23384
orcus - 

Also, I haven't read the 9000 crybaby posts about this incident, but is there actually any reason to think GSP was over in the first place? I.e. just because the AC guy told Nick about their "drop the decimal" rule, is there anything that suggests GSP was 170.1 or greater?


no theres not. this issue goes beyond gsp and diaz. if rules arent being followed, shouldnt that be corrected regardless of whether or not we have proof the broken rule was abused?

3/26/13 7:09 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Anderson's BBC in my Goku
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 8/6/08
Posts: 23385
ShowtimeWreckedMyLeever - 
Anderson's BBC in my Goku -
nineohfive - Who cares?

Diaz fans will dig for anything. It's funny they can't just listen to him talk after the fight and laugh.

-missed open workouts, got in late. every other fighter from the States made it, but not nick's fault.
-slept till 8pm. wasn't awake yet.
-had no help in training
-felt flat out there, lost 5 rounds but is ready to go now
-gsp's wraps were loaded
-we were lied to about the scale
-gsp hits like a girl, he wants a rematch (2 fight losing streak)

this isnt about nick..its about a potential abusive practice that is being used to favor one fighter over another.

Can you explain to me how this favors one fighter more tgan yge other? The rules apply to both of them.... Phone Post

well, it favors the heavier fighter that has to cut weight for one. anyone will tell you but cutting 20 lbs is excrutiating and i would bet many fighters would pay good money for a 1 lb allowance.

second, it obviously would favor the fighter that has actual knowledge of the rule over fighters that arent aware of the rule or are aware of the rule after they already cut the weight.,

3/26/13 7:13 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
orcus
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 03/26/13 7:15 PM
Member Since: 8/1/03
Posts: 76898
Anderson's BBC in my Goku - 
orcus - 
Anderson's BBC in my Goku - 
orcus - 
Anderson's BBC in my Goku - 

what do they mean question of interpretation?

170.1 is greater than the maximum of 170. And even if you wanted to give them the benefit of the doubt, at a minimum you would round to the nearest whole.


What don't you get about "our regulation on combat sports does not take decimals into account"?

He's saying as far as their regulations are concerned, 170.9 is 170. If the two fighters are concerned about decimals, that's their problem.


show me in their regulations where it says that decimals arent counted...

 

...im waiting...


If the guy was lying about that, that's another story, and one that should be easy to prove.

But what does that have to do with what he said being pretty clear? You're acting like they're obligated to round to the nearest whole or whatever; says who? You?

If their regulations say drop the decimal then that's the way it is. Any issues with that and what their UFC contracts say are between Nick, GSP, and Zuffa.


noone is saying they need to round to the nearest number.  im fine if their regulations say decimals are dropped, but show me the regs that say that. you can't because the regs dont say that. you cant have a BS "off-the-record" reg that you dont tell certain fighters about (condit) and only tell other fighters above on the day of the weighins (diaz).

 

absent any such regulations, you rely on the contract, which says the max amount is 170. 170.1 is more than 170.

 

The contract is between the fighters and the promoter, isn't it? That's not the AC's problem. As far as the AC is concerned, a fighter on a scale that reads 170.1 officially weighs 170. I would assume this would satisfy the contract unless the contract actually specifies weight as the reading on the scale.

 

The last five Montreal events, not all of which had GSP on the card, going back to 2008, used no decimals in any fighter weights; only the very first Montreal event in 2008 (headlined by GSP) used decimals.

I don't know why they don't explicitly tell fighters this, but that's apparently how they do it.

3/26/13 7:18 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Anderson's BBC in my Goku
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 8/6/08
Posts: 23386
orcus - 
Anderson's BBC in my Goku - 
orcus - 
Anderson's BBC in my Goku - 
orcus - 
Anderson's BBC in my Goku - 

what do they mean question of interpretation?

170.1 is greater than the maximum of 170. And even if you wanted to give them the benefit of the doubt, at a minimum you would round to the nearest whole.


What don't you get about "our regulation on combat sports does not take decimals into account"?

He's saying as far as their regulations are concerned, 170.9 is 170. If the two fighters are concerned about decimals, that's their problem.


show me in their regulations where it says that decimals arent counted...

 

...im waiting...


If the guy was lying about that, that's another story, and one that should be easy to prove.

But what does that have to do with what he said being pretty clear? You're acting like they're obligated to round to the nearest whole or whatever; says who? You?

If their regulations say drop the decimal then that's the way it is. Any issues with that and what their UFC contracts say are between Nick, GSP, and Zuffa.


noone is saying they need to round to the nearest number.  im fine if their regulations say decimals are dropped, but show me the regs that say that. you can't because the regs dont say that. you cant have a BS "off-the-record" reg that you dont tell certain fighters about (condit) and only tell other fighters above on the day of the weighins (diaz).

 

absent any such regulations, you rely on the contract, which says the max amount is 170. 170.1 is more than 170.

 

The contract is between the fighters and the promoter, isn't it? That's not the AC's problem. As far as the AC is concerned, a fighter on a scale that reads 170.1 officially weighs 170. I would assume this would satisfy the contract unless the contract actually specifies weight as the reading on the scale.

 

The last five Montreal events, not all of which had GSP on the card, going back to 2008, used no decimals in any fighter weights; only the very first Montreal event in 2008 (headlined by GSP) used decimals.

I don't know why they don't explicitly tell fighters this, but that's apparently how they do it.


its between the AC as well..the AC is there to ensure certain aspects of the contract are adhered to including weight..i believe the Quebec regs actually specally say that the appropriate weight will be determined in accordance with the contract..

and you are contradicting yourself by saying the contract isnt relevant to the AC, but then you say whatever the AC says satisfies the contract..thats incorrect..the contract simply says max weight is 170...a plain interpretation of that clause is 170.1 is a breach of the provision

 

 

3/26/13 7:26 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Knuckle Punch
409 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 2/21/10
Posts: 1528
I don't care.

All the athletic commissions do it a little differently it seems. Phone Post
3/26/13 7:28 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Curtis_E_Bare
245 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 03/26/13 7:55 PM
Member Since: 6/3/09
Posts: 46
The way the Quebec AC handles weights is no secret. Watch the UFC 154 weigh ins posted above. Just because someone from the UFC went to Nick to make sure he understand the rules does not make a conspiracy against Nick or for GSP. Perhaps, just maybe, the guy in the video remembered that Nick Diaz missed weight in the past, Nate Diaz missed weight on his first attempt in his title fight (he was unaware of the rules) and said to himself, hey, I'll take a walk over and explain the rules to Diaz just to ensure he knows... or it's a massive French Canadian conspiracy. Take your pick.

This is from the Quebec AC webpage (translated from French by Google).

SECTION X
THE WEIGHT

72 . The categories of weight and weight differences allowed between competitors at a sporting event must comply with the following table:


Weight class weight difference allowed
kg (lb) kg (lb)

1. Least 50.8 (112) 2.26 (5)

2. more than 50.8 (112) 53.52 (118) 2.72 (6)

3. more than 53.52 (118) to 57.15 (126) 3.17 (7)

4. more than 57.15 (126) to 61.23 (135) 3.62 (8)

5. more than 61.23 (135) to 66.67 (147) 4.08 (9)

6. more than 66.67 (147) 69.85 (154) 4.53 (10)

7. more than 69.85 (154) 79.37 (175) 4.98 (11)

8. more than 79.37 (175) to 88.45 (195) 5.44 (12)

9. more than 88.45 (195) NANA


----------------------------------------
All weights, listed in pounds, are to the whole number, not 0.1 pounds. Please note these are the allowed differences between fighter's weights not the different weight classes, it still unambiguously shows how they report weight.

http://racj.gouv.qc.ca/index.php?id=113

http://www2.publicationsduquebec.gouv.qc.ca/dynamicSearch/telecharge.php?type=2&file=%2F%2FS_3_1%2FS3_1R11.htm
3/26/13 7:30 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Anderson's BBC in my Goku
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 8/6/08
Posts: 23387
Curtis_E_Bare - The way the Quebec AC handles weights is no secret. Watch the UFC 154 weigh ins posted above. Just because someone from the UFC went to Nick to make sure he understand the rules does not make a conspiracy against Nick or for GSP. Perhaps, just maybe, the guy in the video remembered that Nick Diaz missed weight in the past, Nate Diaz missed weight on his first attempt in his title fight (he was unaware of the rules) and said to himself, hey, I'll take a walk over and explain the rules to Diaz just to ensure he knows... or it's a massive French Canadian conspiracy. Take your pick.

This is from the Quebec AC webpage (translated from French by Google).

SECTION X
THE WEIGHT

72 . The categories of weight and weight differences allowed between competitors at a sporting event must comply with the following table:


Weight class weight difference allowed
kg (lb) kg (lb)

1. Least 50.8 (112) 2.26 (5)

2. more than 50.8 (112) 53.52 (118) 2.72 (6)

3. more than 53.52 (118) to 57.15 (126) 3.17 (7)

4. more than 57.15 (126) to 61.23 (135) 3.62 (8)

5. more than 61.23 (135) to 66.67 (147) 4.08 (9)

6. more than 66.67 (147) 69.85 (154) 4.53 (10)

7. more than 69.85 (154) 79.37 (175) 4.98 (11)

8. more than 79.37 (175) to 88.45 (195) 5.44 (12)

9. more than 88.45 (195) NANA

All weights listed in pounds are to the nearest pound., not the nearest 0.1 pounds. Please note these are the allowed differences between fighter's weights not the different weight classes, it still unambiguously shows how they report weight.

http://racj.gouv.qc.ca/index.php?id=113

http://www2.publicationsduquebec.gouv.qc.ca/dynamicSearch/telecharge.php?type=2&file=%2F%2FS_3_1%2FS3_1R11.htm

so if i read this correctly, they are violated their own rules because they dont round to the nearest pound. they round all decimals down.

3/26/13 7:30 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
orcus
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 8/1/03
Posts: 76899

"its between the AC as well..the AC is there to ensure certain aspects of the contract are adhered to including weight..i believe the Quebec regs actually specally say that the appropriate weight will be determined in accordance with the contract..

and you are contradicting yourself by saying the contract isnt relevant to the AC, but then you say whatever the AC says satisfies the contract..thats incorrect..the contract simply says max weight is 170...a plain interpretation of that clause is 170.1 is a breach of the provision"

The contract says max weight is 170. Max weight as given by whom? The fighter's manager? No, the AC. If the AC officially records a weight of 170 -- even if the scale reads 170.1 -- then I would assume this means for the purpose of the contract, the fighter is 170. I doubt the contract says "the number on the AC's scale must say 170". 

The last five Montreal cards over the last five years all dropped the decimals. We have no more reason to believe GSP weighed over 170 than that any other fighter on any of those cards missed weight. Should everyone who lost get a rematch because their opponent may have been .9lb heavier than themselves?

 

 

3/26/13 7:31 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Anderson's BBC in my Goku
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 8/6/08
Posts: 23388

also those weight classes arent even UFc weight class so not sure what you are posting

3/26/13 7:35 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Curtis_E_Bare
245 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 6/3/09
Posts: 47
Do you want to know how I know you didn't even read the post?

"Please note these are the allowed differences between fighter's weights not the different weight classes, it still unambiguously shows how they report weight."
3/26/13 7:35 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
orcus
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 8/1/03
Posts: 76900

"so if i read this correctly, they are violated their own rules because they dont round to the nearest pound. they round all decimals down."

If anything, that would mean the guy talking to Nick mis-spoke or made a mistake, and GSP did in fact weigh in at 170 or below, because otherwise he'd have been reported as 171.

I'm not even sure what people are suggesting -- that there was something shady going on but they opted to inform Diaz in advance? To what end? Again, for the last five events all weights have been given without decimals, why give Nick some special heads-up if this were some kind of screwjob? Obviously neither he nor anyone else saw the number on the scale anyway (or if they did, GSP was 170 or below).

This is just Nick and his camp -- and his fans -- being crybabies like they ALWAYS are. He never lost, he's always getting screwed, poor guy.

3/26/13 7:42 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Anderson's BBC in my Goku
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 8/6/08
Posts: 23389
orcus - 

"its between the AC as well..the AC is there to ensure certain aspects of the contract are adhered to including weight..i believe the Quebec regs actually specally say that the appropriate weight will be determined in accordance with the contract..

and you are contradicting yourself by saying the contract isnt relevant to the AC, but then you say whatever the AC says satisfies the contract..thats incorrect..the contract simply says max weight is 170...a plain interpretation of that clause is 170.1 is a breach of the provision"

The contract says max weight is 170. Max weight as given by whom? The fighter's manager? No, the AC. If the AC officially records a weight of 170 -- even if the scale reads 170.1 -- then I would assume this means for the purpose of the contract, the fighter is 170. I doubt the contract says "the number on the AC's scale must say 170". 

The last five Montreal cards over the last five years all dropped the decimals. We have no more reason to believe GSP weighed over 170 than that any other fighter on any of those cards missed weight. Should everyone who lost get a rematch because their opponent may have been .9lb heavier than themselves?

 

 


its obviously implied that the wieght is based on the weight on the scale at the official weighin...not sure its the correct terminology to say its a weight "given by" anyone

again you are missing the point...the AC's own regs say that the weight is governed by the contract...which says 170...170.1 is greater than 170...if the AC's regs say all decimals are rounded down, fine..but it doesnt say that


Reply Post

You must log in to post a reply. Click here to login.