Watch the under-65-kg final between Tanquinho and Rafa

Share it

It’s already three in the morning in Abu Dhabi, but the controversy surrounding the under-65-kg final is far from over.

Not long ago, the Mendes brothers posted the link to the video of the final on Facebook.

Rafael maintains the opinion that he didn’t lose the fight, which was awarded to his opponent by judges’ decision.

The champion, Augusto “Tanquinho” Mendes, though, is still celebrating.

Watch the match and draw your own conclusions.

Note from The substitles were apparently inserted by members of team Atos and don’t necessarily reflect the website’s opinion. We posted the video here to allow our readers the chance to watch it for themselves and voice their opinions.

Ler matéria completa Read more
There are 16 comments for this article
  1. Eko at 9:18 pm

    Rafael won for sure. But those guys are so quick it’s hard to always keep track. I think there should always be two refs, one writes down what happens and how long each position and submission is and one issues points that are not to be seen until the end.

  2. Alfredo Barum at 1:15 am

    No one finishes the fight on top, so no adv even.
    There is no footlock to be defended, so no adv.
    Tanquinho agressive all the time.
    Rafael stalled ffom 50/50, on top after winning 4×2. With hand just blocking Augusto’s leg, so he was stucked.
    This last situation sealed the deal.
    Just more experienced guys can see that, cause Rafaels speed is great. And he only stalled at the main minute, the one before the last. After that they went at it, but no score.

  3. The Koala at 2:28 am

    I believe Tanquino won.
    Yes, there needs to be two refs, but at the end of the day, this is why the decision on the mat stands; when watching a video replay, there may always be something that was very small, that may not have been caught. You can criticize all you want, but Refs have a tough enough job, as is, and I believe the ref made the best decision he could.
    Either way, the score was tied, the advantages were tied, everything was tied.
    Which means no combatant was decisively winning to begin with, so, while an argument can be made for both sides, neither holds ground or merit, as the fight ended in a tie to begin with.

  4. Alfredo at 11:46 am

    I agree with mr Koala, and my decision would be to Augusto because he was looking for the pass while on top, and Rafael very agressive but only in the bottem, on top, he tried to keep it locket up. Of course Augusto could not do the same thing because he was never up in the score, otherwise maybe he would have done the same.
    Small strategy concepts that made this fight great. Thanks to both finalists.
    About the first coment, if one had won for “sure”, we would not be discussing it.
    I reather keep my opinion to me, but i thought Gracie Mag should not publish the caption, that says things not really judged by an authority.

  5. Rafael Ellwanger at 1:10 pm

    Tanquinho won, was 4×4 for sure.
    the guy who put the comments on this video for sure do not know the rules very well or it is too passion about his student or teammate.
    i would give the foot lock advantage to rafael for the toe hold, but tanquinho attack the knee bar in the end and did not get advantage either. So the ref kept his standards, he did not give any advantage for leg attack unless the fighters defended .
    on the last seconds of the fight, rafael did not finish the position on top, he was defending a knee bar and when tanquinho let it go, he scramble and went back to his knees.

  6. Pingback: china dumps shop
  7. Pingback: easyweb td bank login
  8. Pingback: intelligent automation consultants
  9. Pingback: replica cheapest copy tag
  10. Pingback: Research
  11. Pingback: replica rolex clone cheap
  12. Pingback: dimond paintings
  13. Pingback: Villas Near Hyderabad Outer Ring Road for Outright Sale
  14. Pingback: benelli supernova

Deixe um comentário

O seu endereço de e-mail não será publicado.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.