UnderGround Forums
 

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


3/26/13 7:44 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Anderson's BBC in my Goku
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 03/26/13 7:44 PM
Member Since: 8/6/08
Posts: 23390
orcus - 

"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.

 

lol..you are dense and are totally missing the point..noone is saying GSP weighed in over 170 or that if he did weigh 170.9 it would make a difference..i said from the beginning that GSP would beat nick and he did just that...this is a larger issue about an AC potentially engaging in illicit and abusive practices

 

 

the vid is clear he says if you weight 170.9, thats 170..thats reiterated by the AC's own statement...they disregard decimals...so either the above poster posted something that is completely wrong or the AC is contradicting itself

3/26/13 7:48 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Curtis_E_Bare
104 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 6/3/09
Posts: 48
I see you are purposely ignoring the whole discussion on metrology, uncertainty and ways to deal with uncertainty. The fact is, for measured values you cannot say 170.1 is greater than 170. This isn't pure math. Perhaps you don't understand, but that does not make it any less true. The AC chooses how they deal with the inherent errors is weight measurements.

For combat sports in Quebec, 170.1 = 170
3/26/13 7:52 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
orcus
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 8/1/03
Posts: 76903

"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"

Why is that implied? If the scale is not accurate, the number changes but the fighter's true weight does not. 

"again you are missing the point...the AC's own regs say that the weight is governed by the contract.."

Where does it say that? I see something about the "maximum weight achieved at the official weigh-in". Well, again, the "official" weight is apparently one that has no decimals. If a fighter weighs 170.9 in a system that drops decimals, then as far as the official weigh-in is concerned, the maximum weight achieved was 170. Why are you so confused by this concept? It's extremely easy to understand, whether or not you agree with the practice.

Regardless, nothing was done differently here than at any of the previous Montreal cards other than the very first. Do you want to throw out all those results?

3/26/13 7:55 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
orcus
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 8/1/03
Posts: 76904

"the vid is clear he says if you weight 170.9, thats 170..thats reiterated by the AC's own statement...they disregard decimals...so either the above poster posted something that is completely wrong or the AC is contradicting itself"

How is the rep saying they will drop the decimals contradicted by rules that round kilograms up to the nearest pound for purposes of limiting the difference in weight between two fighters.

".this is a larger issue about an AC potentially engaging in illicit and abusive practices"

You're missing the point, this is how they've been doing it for years, maybe if fighters or managers thought it was weird how all fighters in all events in Montreal weigh in at nice round numbers, they could have asked about it in advance themselves before fighting there.

3/26/13 7:56 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: 23391
Curtis_E_Bare - I see you are purposely ignoring the whole discussion on metrology, uncertainty and ways to deal with uncertainty. The fact is, for measured values you cannot say 170.1 is greater than 170. This isn't pure math. Perhaps you don't understand, but that does not make it any less true. The AC chooses how they deal with the inherent errors is weight measurements.

For combat sports in Quebec, 170.1 = 170

uh wut? we cannot say 170.1 is greater than 170. really. show me what rule of the universe proves this.

3/26/13 8:00 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Curtis_E_Bare
104 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 6/3/09
Posts: 49
Are you really unable to recall the posts from just a few hours ago about uncertainty in measured values? Seriously, it was just a few hours ago. Scroll back a few pages and read the posts again.
3/26/13 8:02 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: 23392
orcus - 

"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"

Why is that implied? If the scale is not accurate, the number changes but the fighter's true weight does not. 

"again you are missing the point...the AC's own regs say that the weight is governed by the contract.."

Where does it say that? I see something about the "maximum weight achieved at the official weigh-in". Well, again, the "official" weight is apparently one that has no decimals. If a fighter weighs 170.9 in a system that drops decimals, then as far as the official weigh-in is concerned, the maximum weight achieved was 170. Why are you so confused by this concept? It's extremely easy to understand, whether or not you agree with the practice.

Regardless, nothing was done differently here than at any of the previous Montreal cards other than the very first. Do you want to throw out all those results?


lol..ok if its not implied that the weight is based on the scale during official weighins..how is it determined? by tarot cards? the bones of a small bird perhaps?

 

as to your second point,  here are the regs:

 

"To participate in a combat sports event, a contestant shall be bound to the organizer of that event by a contract that is valid for a single sports event and that provides for or stipulates, in particular...  (7)    the maximum weight that the contestant must achieve at the official weigh-in;"
 
there is no provision in the regs that provides that decimals are not counted....in fact, in reference to weight there are numerous examples of decimals being used in the reg
 
you assume that the "official' weight is apparently the one that has no decimals...there is no such provision in the regs or the contract...absent that, you should apply the plain reading of both the statute and the contract
3/26/13 8:03 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: 23393
Curtis_E_Bare - Are you really unable to recall the posts from just a few hours ago about uncertainty in measured values? Seriously, it was just a few hours ago. Scroll back a few pages and read the posts again.

yeah..i saw that you posted a bunch of links..but none of those links said that you should disregard all decimals or the last decimal used by scales...

3/26/13 8:05 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: 23394
orcus - 

"the vid is clear he says if you weight 170.9, thats 170..thats reiterated by the AC's own statement...they disregard decimals...so either the above poster posted something that is completely wrong or the AC is contradicting itself"

How is the rep saying they will drop the decimals contradicted by rules that round kilograms up to the nearest pound for purposes of limiting the difference in weight between two fighters.

".this is a larger issue about an AC potentially engaging in illicit and abusive practices"

You're missing the point, this is how they've been doing it for years, maybe if fighters or managers thought it was weird how all fighters in all events in Montreal weigh in at nice round numbers, they could have asked about it in advance themselves before fighting there.


its contradictory because you are saying there is some enforceable unwritten rule that says all decimals should be rounded down, but the regs say that decimals should be rounded up for some other purpose...why the inconsistency? shouldnt they apply the same rule for all measurements?

 

its hard for fighters or managers to raise an issue when in every single UFC event they NEVER announce the decimals, so how would they be on notice that they are ROUNDING DOWN decimals

3/26/13 8:07 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
JimmersonzGlove
508 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 6/5/05
Posts: 31177
Interdasting
3/26/13 8:13 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Masakyst
38 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 7/23/10
Posts: 3646
Was Georges heavier than 170.0?
3/26/13 8:14 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
dperr
2 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 5/20/12
Posts: 182
Its quebec they do whatever they want Phone Post
3/26/13 8:26 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
orcus
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 03/26/13 8:34 PM
Member Since: 8/1/03
Posts: 76906

"lol..ok if its not implied that the weight is based on the scale during official weighins..how is it determined? by tarot cards? the bones of a small bird perhaps?"

No one said it's not "based on the scale". The weight is determined by the scale and whatever rounding/dropping rules they use. This isn't rocket science. There is one guy looking at the scale and calling out a number. The number he calls out is the official weight, the end; and in Quebec for the last five years, this number has always had no decimals.

"you assume that the "official' weight is apparently the one that has no decimals...there is no such provision in the regs or the contract...absent that, you should apply the plain reading of both the statute and the contract"

We know that the "official weight" has no decimals, because every official weight for every fighter on every Montreal card but the first one has an official weight with no decimals. Again, if you don't like the policy of discarding the decimals, that's fine, but don't pretend like it's something shady or biased or unfair or selectively applied. It's applied across the board to all fighters.

"its contradictory because you are saying there is some enforceable unwritten rule that says all decimals should be rounded down, but the regs say that decimals should be rounded up for some other purpose...why the inconsistency? shouldnt they apply the same rule for all measurements?"

First, do the regs say decimals should be rounded up, or does a section laying out weight difference limits simply happen to round its converted kilos-to-pound figures? Presumably the weigh-in involved no conversion unless the guy is really good at doing math in his head quickly.

Second, should they apply the same rounding rule for all measurements? Sure. Do they? Apparently not. Again it seems like your problem is with their policy itself.

"its hard for fighters or managers to raise an issue when in every single UFC event they NEVER announce the decimals, so how would they be on notice that they are ROUNDING DOWN decimals"

What are you talking about? Look at the very last card before this one:

Ronda Rousey (134.6) vs. Liz Carmouche (133.6)

Urijah Faber (136) vs. Ivan Menjivar (135.6)
 
Mike Chiesa (156.2) vs. Anton Kuivanen (156)
 
Nah-Shon Burrell (175.8) vs. Yuri Villefort (170)

 

 

3/26/13 8:35 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Curtis_E_Bare
104 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 6/3/09
Posts: 50
Anderson's BBC in my Goku - 
Curtis_E_Bare - Are you really unable to recall the posts from just a few hours ago about uncertainty in measured values? Seriously, it was just a few hours ago. Scroll back a few pages and read the posts again.

yeah..i saw that you posted a bunch of links..but none of those links said that you should disregard all decimals or the last decimal used by scales...


Just because you don't understand it doesn't make it not true.

Here's one more link that might help.

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Uncertainties+in+Measurements.
3/26/13 9:42 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: 23395
orcus -

"lol..ok if its not implied that the weight is based on the scale during official weighins..how is it determined? by tarot cards? the bones of a small bird perhaps?"

No one said it's not "based on the scale". The weight is determined by the scale and whatever rounding/dropping rules they use. This isn't rocket science. There is one guy looking at the scale and calling out a number. The number he calls out is the official weight, the end; and in Quebec for the last five years, this number has always had no decimals.

"you assume that the "official' weight is apparently the one that has no decimals...there is no such provision in the regs or the contract...absent that, you should apply the plain reading of both the statute and the contract"

We know that the "official weight" has no decimals, because every official weight for every fighter on every Montreal card but the first one has an official weight with no decimals. Again, if you don't like the policy of discarding the decimals, that's fine, but don't pretend like it's something shady or biased or unfair or selectively applied. It's applied across the board to all fighters.

"its contradictory because you are saying there is some enforceable unwritten rule that says all decimals should be rounded down, but the regs say that decimals should be rounded up for some other purpose...why the inconsistency? shouldnt they apply the same rule for all measurements?"

First, do the regs say decimals should be rounded up, or does a section laying out weight difference limits simply happen to round its converted kilos-to-pound figures? Presumably the weigh-in involved no conversion unless the guy is really good at doing math in his head quickly.

Second, should they apply the same rounding rule for all measurements? Sure. Do they? Apparently not. Again it seems like your problem is with their policy itself.

"its hard for fighters or managers to raise an issue when in every single UFC event they NEVER announce the decimals, so how would they be on notice that they are ROUNDING DOWN decimals"

What are you talking about? Look at the very last card before this one:

Ronda Rousey (134.6) vs. Liz Carmouche (133.6)

Urijah Faber (136) vs. Ivan Menjivar (135.6)
 
Mike Chiesa (156.2) vs. Anton Kuivanen (156)
 
Nah-Shon Burrell (175.8) vs. Yuri Villefort (170)

 

 

Lol. Ok so if the commissioner guy calls out nick diaz 265 lbs that's all that matters not what the scale says? Jesus try thinking about what u type before u type it.

And when do the officials ever call out decimals? I'm not talking about what is written in the record. Try to think practically tard. Nick has never fought in Quebec. Apparently Quebec is the only jurisdiction in the universe that disregards decimals for weight. Every other jurisdiction counts decimals. How the hell is a fighter supposed to know about this unwritten rule that goes against the custom of every other AC out there? U think nick keeps track of each weigh in and whether or not the AC counts decimals? Did anyone know about this rule? Other fighters? media? fans? Come back to real life dorkus. Phone Post
3/26/13 9:44 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: 23396
Curtis_E_Bare -
Anderson's BBC in my Goku - 
Curtis_E_Bare - Are you really unable to recall the posts from just a few hours ago about uncertainty in measured values? Seriously, it was just a few hours ago. Scroll back a few pages and read the posts again.

yeah..i saw that you posted a bunch of links..but none of those links said that you should disregard all decimals or the last decimal used by scales...


Just because you don't understand it doesn't make it not true.

Here's one more link that might help.

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Uncertainties+in+Measurements.
Dude. Don't just copy and paste shit. Tell me why th last digit for scales should be disregarded. Don't give me some fucking theory on why the last digit is the least reliable one. That doesn't mean shit. The question is, is it so unreliable it should be disregarded? If that's the case then obviously scales would actually count out to one additional decimal and just show te second to last decimal. Meaning the last decimal shown is actually reliable right? Phone Post
3/26/13 10:26 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
twizzle97
16 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 7/18/03
Posts: 2662
170.9 is not 170. If it is considered to be so in this jurisdiction, then this should be made clear.

To a fighter trying to make weight, I imagine it makes a huge difference. This info can't be off the record.

It doesn't matter who the fighters are. Phone Post
3/26/13 10:36 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Curtis_E_Bare
104 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 6/3/09
Posts: 51
Anderson's BBC in my Goku - 
Curtis_E_Bare -
Anderson's BBC in my Goku - 
Curtis_E_Bare - Are you really unable to recall the posts from just a few hours ago about uncertainty in measured values? Seriously, it was just a few hours ago. Scroll back a few pages and read the posts again.

yeah..i saw that you posted a bunch of links..but none of those links said that you should disregard all decimals or the last decimal used by scales...


Just because you don't understand it doesn't make it not true.

Here's one more link that might help.

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Uncertainties+in+Measurements.
Dude. Don't just copy and paste shit. Tell me why th last digit for scales should be disregarded. Don't give me some fucking theory on why the last digit is the least reliable one. That doesn't mean shit. The question is, is it so unreliable it should be disregarded? If that's the case then obviously scales would actually count out to one additional decimal and just show te second to last decimal. Meaning the last decimal shown is actually reliable right? Phone Post

I have, you just choose to ignore it. See this post:

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.

Nothing changes the fact that Quebec ignores the last digit, has for the past five years worth of UFC events and it was no secret. See any on of the multiple weigh-in videos that have already been posted.
3/26/13 10:52 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
orcus
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 03/26/13 11:24 PM
Member Since: 8/1/03
Posts: 76927

"Lol. Ok so if the commissioner guy calls out nick diaz 265 lbs that's all that matters not what the scale says? Jesus try thinking about what u type before u type it."

lol ok so if the scale is off and says Nick is 265, that's all that matters, that's his weight and he forfeits 20% of his purse? Jesus try thinking about what you type before you type it.

The fighter weighs what he weighs. Neither what the scale says nor what the official says changes that. The fighter's "official weight", however, is what the official says it is, being what the scale says combined with whatever rounding they do. Not sure why this is utterly incomprehensible to you.

"And when do the officials ever call out decimals?"

In every single event in which the official weights use decimals. Like the ones I posted.

"Apparently Quebec is the only jurisdiction in the universe that disregards decimals for weight."

No, the Rio events at least also use no decimals.

" U think nick keeps track of each weigh in and whether or not the AC counts decimals? Did anyone know about this rule? Other fighters? media? fans? Come back to real life dorkus."

There've been what, 84 fighters on Montreal cards? They all have the best view of the scale in the house. They see what it says and they hear what is announced and they know better than anyone what the difference is between the two. Apparently none have ever bothered to say anything about how the numbers are rounded. Either they found it unremarkable, they knew in advance, or every single one of them failed to notice somehow. Were they or their management informed in advance by the UFC or the AC? Was it in some document available to them in advance? I have no clue. 

In any case, once again, we're back to it being a "house rule" the AC chooses to use. It applies equally to all fighters, and as far as we know the only fighter EVER informed of it is Nick Diaz -- we don't even know that GSP knew about it -- and it was the UFC that informed him, not the AC.

So yeah, what exactly do you want? What are you trying to say? That the Quebec AC is goofy? Okay. That they should update the regs on their website with their "unofficial rules"? Okay.

3/26/13 11:49 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
jcblass
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 9/8/02
Posts: 6657
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.

This ends the debate. Back in 2008 they Canadian Commission is on the record as saying 170.9 would be considered 170....

DId they really have foreknowledge of this fight 5 years later and set into motion a set of rules aimed at aiding GSP???
3/26/13 11:58 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
orcus
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 8/1/03
Posts: 76935

I think the funniest thing about all this is that somehow the fact that NICK was told that if HE weighed 170.9, it would be fine, and if he were over, he'd have an extra hour, means that *GSP* was overweight.

I have the oddest feeling that if the video were someone telling GSP that if he weighed 170.9 it would go down as 170, somehow this would STILL indicate that GSP was the one benefiting from "cheating".

No matter who said what to whom, people will take it to mean GSP was overweight and given special treatment, even though GSP has never once missed weight (Nick has missed by 9lb in EliteXC), even though Montreal always rounds off numbers, and even though they gave Bernard Hopkins 2 hours to make weight after missing it for a title fight.

3/27/13 12:35 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Winston Wolf
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 34035
for once Goku is correct
3/27/13 12:37 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
orcus
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 8/1/03
Posts: 76940

No, it's been proven repeatedly that neither the dropping of decimals nor the extra time for fighters who miss weight was anything unique to this fight, much less to GSP.

3/27/13 12:44 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Winston Wolf
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 34038
weighing in over the alloted champion weight class is unheard of in any sport or country the weight is 170.0 not an ounce over.They may have announced fighters at a rounded off weight for the fans to hear as long as the fighter is UNDERRRRRR the weight not OVERRR duhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
3/27/13 12:45 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Winston Wolf
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 34039
where has it been proven ?they announced the weight ronded off as long as the fighter is under the weight class

Reply Post

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