HomeFight Videos Michael Chandler vs Eddie Alvarez 2 Fight Video Bellator 106 Main Event Bruno November 3, 2013 Fight Videos 29 Comments Michael Chandler vs Eddie Alvarez 2 The Rematch Fight Video Bellator 106 Main Event. This was for the Bellator lightweight title. Tweet Pin It Tags:Bellator 106, Bellator 106 Fight Videos, Eddie Alvarez, Michael Chandler Joe Riggs vs Mike Bronzoulis Fight Video Bellator 106 – Fight master Finale Muhammed King Mo Lawal vs Emanuel Newton 2 Fight Video Bellator 106 29 Comments marvelous mad madam mim November 3, 2013 good fight Log in to Reply Ac5 November 3, 2013 I had Chandler 48-47 pretty clear to me… Log in to Reply CaptainObvious November 3, 2013 The judges sure shit the bed on this one. I wanted Alvarez to win but i know he didnt win that one. Log in to Reply Maximumpain November 3, 2013 Great fight! Glad the judges saw the 2nd round the same way I did and not the way Jimmy Smith had it. Log in to Reply *****lipsbjj November 3, 2013 What a fight. Could have gone to either fighter. Both guys need a shot in the ufc. They desperately need fighters like these 2 Log in to Reply MMAGiantSilva November 3, 2013 Pretty confident Chandler won that fight. But boy ohh boy was it another great one between those two. The commission needs to make up their mind though if you say you dont count damage than you turn around and count damage, thats just not right, that is the only way Alvarez won the fight is if you count damage. Log in to Reply gfg November 3, 2013 what a robbery Log in to Reply Schtuppin' Hawking the F*ing Genius November 3, 2013 I was pulling for Alvarez, but he lost. Wait, he won? Pretty clear it was Chandler 48-47, but watcha goin’ do? Hopefully we can watch these guys do it again cuz that was fun. Log in to Reply normal November 3, 2013 ^ It could have gone either way, but it is messed up how the judges didn’t weigh the fact that Chandler was the champ and Alvarez should have earned the belt. Basically, if the fight can go either way, the champ should retain the belt. Isn’t that right? WTF?!! Good example is the Jones Guatafsson fight. Log in to Reply icolater November 3, 2013 What a fight!! Chandler won IMO, but at least we get to see a 3rd fight, hope its in the UFC, these guy deserve to be in the biggest MMA organisation so the whole world can see there efforts. Log in to Reply shocktime November 3, 2013 Razor this close fight, so by default it should go to Chandler. Log in to Reply shocktime November 3, 2013 Razor thin. Anyway fantastic fight and both guys need to get in the UFC and make some good money. Log in to Reply dmfh1981 November 3, 2013 Wow-Chandler got COMPLETELY robbed! Alvarez seemed to be running a lot & got taken down REPEATEDLY!! Good fight & all, but y’all are nuts if you say it could’ve went either way-especially since this was a title fight… Log in to Reply bigFishLittlepond November 3, 2013 Eddie won fair and square. How do you reward Chandler (rounds 1 and 2) for getting beat up? You know why Chandler started to wrestle at the end of the second and throughout the rest of the fight right? Because Eddie was lighting him up and he was about to get dropped. He wrestled out of desperation… no rewards there. And I’m not even talking about the damage Chandler took the first two rounds I’m talking about getting tagged over and over again. Chandler was punching the air and his takedowns were largely getting stuffed or shrugged off. Anyone who thinks Chandler won the first two rounds should be watching golf. I gave Chandler the 4th because he won that clearly. Eddie won the 5th and I also believe he won the 3rd but it doesn’t matter because 3 is more than 2. It’s obvious to me the UFC propaganda machine is taking to these boards trying to justify any nonsense they can. UFC didn’t want Eddie to win they wanted him to lose so they could laugh at Bellator because they fought to keep him. Eddie winning means he stays at Bellator (probably forever which is a huge gain for Bellator) and the UFC loses him forever. Bellator is going to make many superfights with Eddie and the UFC propaganda machine is clearly butthurt over that. So they’re littering these boards saying Eddie lost trying to sear into the conscious’ of people that Eddie is basically revenant and by default so is a 3rd fight. But at the end of the day. And…… New……. Lightweight Champion of the World. Well, you get the picture. Log in to Reply bigFishLittlepond November 3, 2013 *irrelevant Log in to Reply Timzda November 3, 2013 Great fight, big fan of Eddie but I believe he lost that one. Chandler is a beast. Log in to Reply Concealedweaponclothing November 3, 2013 I’m just laughing at how people are acting like it was clearly easily chandler that just makes u guys sound dumb as hell to watch a fight like that and try to claim there was a solid easy to see clear winner. Lol I been in mma 17 years I called allverez for the win and by no means was there enough of a domminance by either guy to act shocked over who they picked for the win Log in to Reply T November 3, 2013 I was cheering for Eddie, glad he won. That being said I had Chandler winning that fight, and MMAGiantSilva has it right, Eddie won on damage but Chandler won on rounds. Seeing as how winning on damage isn’t supposed to count in the 10 point scoring system, I think Chandler should have come up with decision. Either way it was a helluva fight and happy we will get to see a 3rd soon. Log in to Reply Ozinator November 4, 2013 @concealedaeaponclothing, I can understand you are laughing but the rest is unintelligible. Who sounds dumb? If you were cheering for Alvarez at the end but also thought he lost by at least 1 round and most likely 2, I agree and think that just make u guy sound smart Log in to Reply ETK November 4, 2013 The video is going faster than real time. Every 1 second is reduced by 1/4-1/2. Log in to Reply bigFishLittlepond November 4, 2013 T – Winning on damage still counts in MMA but they changed the name in 2012. It is now called “effective striking” rather than “damage due to striking.” You want to know why? Because the powers that be thought the word “damage” being used over and over again would eventually make the promoters liable and the fighters open to compensation in the future (just type in “mma judging effective damage” and you’ll see an article explaining it at mixedmartialarts) It’s all semantics. According to the ABC unified rules for judging in MMA judges are supposed to score any damage they see under the banner of “effective striking” which in MMA, is the first banner they are to look for. So, not only does damage count in MMA judging, it is the number one thing as it pertains to “effective striking” separate from a KO. Hope this helps with all the confusion on these boards. Log in to Reply PAPABear November 4, 2013 Chandler took an ass beating from hell….his career isnt gona be very long if every time he fights he gets 10% brain damage from the beatings he takes. Chandler really needs to improve his defense.. Log in to Reply bigFishLittlepond November 4, 2013 It is now called “effective striking” rather than “damage due to striking.” You want to know why? Because the powers that be thought the word “damage” being used over and over again would eventually make the promoters liable and the fighters open to compensation in the future (just type in “mma judging effective damage” and you’ll see an article explaining it at mixedmartialarts) It’s all semantics. According to the ABC unified rules for judging in MMA judges are supposed to score any damage they see under the banner of “effective striking” which in MMA, is the first banner they are to look for. So, not only does damage count in MMA judging, it is the number one thing as it pertains to “effective striking” separate from a KO. Log in to Reply Tesla Coil November 4, 2013 I had Eddie winning a close decision. I would have no problems with either guy winning, though. Based on meaningful strikes, clearly Alvarez won, based on takedowns, Chandler would have won. The fact that Chandler did basically ZERO, and I mean ZERO, damage on the takedown, I’m glad that Alvarez won. In the 4th, when Chandler was laying and praying and, blood was all over Alvarez, I initially thought that a cut got opened up, however, you can clearly see from the start of the next round that all that blood was basically Chandler bleeding all over Eddie and that Chandler basically did nothing while on top. People seem to forget that this is a FIGHT, non meaningful technique should definitely be weighted less. Takedowns are just vehicles that give you a better opportunity to do more damage, or end fights. Takedowns themselves mean nothing unless the takedown itself yields damage, IMO (say a Judo throw and the guy thrown gets knocked out or hurt etc…). People seem to forget that. This isn’t wrestling rules, this is MMA. Wrestling gives you the base to ground and then control your opponent to then do other things (KO, submit etc…). There is no rule where it says takedowns carry more weight than damage, just like it says damage doesn’t count more over the course of the fight. That said, a judge can certainly SCORE more points for DAMAGE over ineffectual takedowns over a SINGLE round if they chose to. Close fight. Close either way. Factor effective technique (which does yield higher damage), the fight wasn’t that close for Alvarez. Log in to Reply tobes November 5, 2013 I think that maybe Chandler deserved that win, but at the same time, that last round was almost a 10-8. It was pretty obvious that he was just hanging on for dear life. Crowd definitely swayed the judges scorecards. If you score the fight by ‘damage’ then Alvarez is the clear winner. If you score by aggression and control, then Chandler. It’s similar to the Condit/Hendricks fight IMO. What’s AWESOME about this result is that we will likely see a THIRD awesome fight between these two. Their first two fights deserve an epic conclusion. This was an incredible fight. Props to both warriors. Log in to Reply normal November 5, 2013 @Bigpondlittlefish Can you please explain the jones/gustafsson fight genius! Log in to Reply bigFishLittlepond November 5, 2013 normal – bad judging. And don’t pop off. I did some research. I didn’t add or subtract from anything, just presented the facts. But considering the dumbing down currently going on in our society I suppose anyone doing anything rather than following the herd mentality is considered genius these days. Log in to Reply Facefrack November 6, 2013 Glad to see so many responses to this fight! Maybe it was a little too close to say that Chandler got robbed, but I definitely had him up on my scorecard. Alvarez is a beast… Maybe my favorite fighter outside the UFC… But I’d really like to see the judges cards, because it really doesn’t make sense that he won. I’m gonna have to watch it again… Sweet! Log in to Reply Tesla Coil November 6, 2013 2 4th rds tell the tale on how judges might perceive the fights. Based on Damage and overall effective striking, I would have given Gustafsson the W as well, but that 4th round elbow pulled it out for Jones in the end. without that, there would have been no perceived momentum shift and based on all things being pretty equal, the judges would have scored more based on damage. Meaning the 5th would probably been tiebreaked over damage (i.e toss up going either way). Without that elbow, no way Jones keeps that belt. He literally looked like he got tooled by Gustafsson like he stole something. Jones kept the belt, but Alex definitely won the fight. Walking out, while the other guy gets wheeled out is really no comparison. Dominant 4th rd for Chandler too, but severe lack of damage done served against him in his fight. He obviously didn’t get enough “control” points since he didn’t actually control his opponent enough to do any additional damage or really even improve his position or threaten to end the fight. Log in to Reply Leave a Reply Cancel replyYou must be logged in to post a comment.