Alright im drunk enough to be willing

in Jones vs Hamill, Jones dominated and destroyed Hamill from the beginning of the fight because he was the far, far better fighter. He threw Hamill down and mounted him from the start of the fight and just started destroying Hamill from the mount, Hamill only won off some fluke technicality that when Jones was battering Hamill he threw a downward elbow, the ref stopped the fight to take a point away from Jones for it, and then when they went back to fight Hamill was too fucked up from the beating so Jones got a bullshit DQ of a technicality.

So Jones destroyed Hamill from the beginning and only lost by DQ from a bogus technicality.

In Rockhold vs Weidman, they are 2 fighters in the same skill class while Jones was in an infinitely higher skill class. In Rockhold vs Weidman it was a competitive fight early on but Rockhold still won the first 3 rounds on the scorecards by the judges.

I gave Weidman the 1st round, but 2 of the 3 judges gave Rockhold it. But the 2nd round which you somehow gave Weidman a 10-8 for was easily a Rockhold round that all 3 judges gave to him ... watch the fight again, not only did Weidman not win by 10-8, he didnt even win the round.

So heading into the 3rd round Rockhold is up 20-18, 20-18, 19-19 on the judges scorecard, the 3rd round happens and Rockhold wins it 10-8 by battering Weidman to the point most would have stopped it.

So heading into the 4th round, Rockhold is up 30-26, 30-26, 29-27 ... and then he just finished a hurt Weidman early on.

What you are saying makes zero sense, even if Weidman could have won a decision which he clearly couldnt have by judges scorecards, your comparisons and are logic are so far off and wrong. Rockhold won all 4 rounds vs Weidman according to 2 of the 3 judges and TKO'd Weidman in the end. Jones outclassed and destroyed an inferior opponent but Hamill got the win off a bogus DQ while he being pounded on.