Spring Break
Extra Points: Controversy over UFC 104
John Pfortrmiller
Issue date: 11/2/09 Section: Sports
Since the light heavyweight title fight between Lyoto Machida and Mauricio Rua, UFC scoring judges have been criticized as unprofessional, lazy and inept.
However, none of it is true.
The bout on Oct. 24 was composed of the typical five rounds (five minutes each) in the UFC octagon.
The fight went all five rounds, even though both fighters are considered two of the best strikers in the UFC today.
What created the controversy for the judges was the high volume of internet squabble after the fight ended.
Viewers finished watching the fight, turned around and went right to work spreading rumors on sites such as Twitter.
What followed was yet another day in rumorville.
Bloggers said the judges were not scoring the bout correctly, were not paying attention or were poorly seated and this obstructed their view of the fight.
None of these accusations could be further from the truth.
These judges know a lot more about scoring a UFC title fight than most.
They are required to take courses designed to teach them how to score close fights, such as this one.
The rumors spread about the judges' lack of attention are also unfounded. The judges are trained to watch each 5-minute round without taking their eyes off the action.
They are also not sitting with anyone who would have an affect on their scoring.
The obstructed view point, brought up by bloggers, is slightly debatable. The way a judge sees a fight depends on where he/she is sitting. In this case, the judges all had slightly different angles of the fight, but still had the best seats in the house.
Regardless, the judges performed their jobs to the best of their abilities.
They followed the Unified Rules of Mixed Martial Arts and scored the bout without bias.
The whole controversy aspect seems like a bunch of folks who are mad about losing bets.
The fight was extremely close and was scored 48-47, in favor of the light heavyweight title holder, Machida. ESPN odds estimated the same score, with the challenger, Rua, winning.
However, none of it is true.
The bout on Oct. 24 was composed of the typical five rounds (five minutes each) in the UFC octagon.
The fight went all five rounds, even though both fighters are considered two of the best strikers in the UFC today.
What created the controversy for the judges was the high volume of internet squabble after the fight ended.
Viewers finished watching the fight, turned around and went right to work spreading rumors on sites such as Twitter.
What followed was yet another day in rumorville.
Bloggers said the judges were not scoring the bout correctly, were not paying attention or were poorly seated and this obstructed their view of the fight.
None of these accusations could be further from the truth.
These judges know a lot more about scoring a UFC title fight than most.
They are required to take courses designed to teach them how to score close fights, such as this one.
The rumors spread about the judges' lack of attention are also unfounded. The judges are trained to watch each 5-minute round without taking their eyes off the action.
They are also not sitting with anyone who would have an affect on their scoring.
The obstructed view point, brought up by bloggers, is slightly debatable. The way a judge sees a fight depends on where he/she is sitting. In this case, the judges all had slightly different angles of the fight, but still had the best seats in the house.
Regardless, the judges performed their jobs to the best of their abilities.
They followed the Unified Rules of Mixed Martial Arts and scored the bout without bias.
The whole controversy aspect seems like a bunch of folks who are mad about losing bets.
The fight was extremely close and was scored 48-47, in favor of the light heavyweight title holder, Machida. ESPN odds estimated the same score, with the challenger, Rua, winning.
Viewing Comments 1 - 8 of 9
walter castro
posted 11/02/09 @ 3:42 PM CST
i strongly agree with the judges,they scored it perfectly,people gotta understand that the champion is defending the title against the chalenger rua,rua did not do enough to win the fight,he was more afraid to get hit,u have to commit when u r challenging for the light heavyweight title,lol,rua got out classed,what a few kicks to the ribs,please that not enough,lyoto is the real deal rua sucks
mrbk
posted 11/02/09 @ 3:55 PM CST
agreed!!!! machida was doing pretty good defending(aside from the kicks)..but even after all them kicks machida still didnt go down and rua still didnt go in for the kill lol. (Continued…)
D-jr
posted 11/02/09 @ 4:28 PM CST
Shogun didnt do enough to win on any judges score card... but Forrest Griffin did enough to beat Rampage?!?!? IMO the judging is subjective as hell
angus506
posted 11/02/09 @ 6:13 PM CST
the majority of ufc fighters had shogun winning the fight, and when i say majority, i mean about 99 per cent, so maybe guys like randy couture dont know anything about MMA RETARD
George
posted 11/02/09 @ 11:56 PM CST
What blind faith in authority.
FrankenSensei
posted 11/03/09 @ 2:10 AM CST
.. When Lyoto Machida has blazed through all his previous fights making his opponents look bad, the expectations of people "including" fighters is that he will do the the same thing to Rua. (Continued…)
Berto
posted 11/03/09 @ 3:15 PM CST
Ok just to start out let me say this ... You said the judges know more on scoring in an mma bout ... Hmmm WRONG
most judges are ex-boxing judges or boxer so right off the bat they favor punching and if im not mistaken one of the judges said when lyoto got hit by those kicks he didnt show any emosion so he didnt think it hurt . (Continued…)
John
posted 11/08/09 @ 6:40 PM CST
Folks,
I greatly appreciate the comments so far both negative and positive. Let me make a few points.
1) Please keep it mature. I don't mean to call you out Berto, but calling someone a 'fag' does not help your arguments. (Continued…)
Post a Comment