Lyoto Machida is no stranger to controversial decisions, having experienced them from both the winning and losing side. Two of the most highly contested decisions in the last year were the Machida vs. "Shogun" Mauricio Rua (19-4) title fight and most recently, Machida vs. "Rampage". Both were incredibly close fights that would have greatly benefited from the use of more effective judging criteria such as expanded scoring in the 10-Point Must system, judging the winner by the fight as a whole instead of by each round, or with the Japanese Ippon System. (Photo courtesy of Zuffa, LLC.)
On November 20, two men faced each other in a bout that exposed every conceivable error in the way the Unified Rules of mixed martial arts regulates the judging of MMA competition. “The Dragon” Lyoto Machida (16-2) faced “Rampage” Quinton Jackson (29-8) in what resulted in a Split Decision victory for “Rampage” that is more questioned than contested. Valid arguments can be made for every possible outcome of the fight. Be it a draw, a win for Jackson, or a win for Machida, there was no “wrong” scoring of this bout under the current criteria listed under the 10-Point Must Scoring System used to score bouts in MMA. This is truly a major problem that hits a lot harder than anyone other than a top level fighter could know. To an outside observer, a fan, a journalist, or even a promoter, the problem of a scoring system with that degree of malleability concerning closely contested bouts doesn’t pose a threat to the integrity of the sport as a whole, and in fact it doesn’t. However, UFC President Dana White said it right when he stated at the UFC 123 post fight press conference,
It isn’t like being in the NBA. Those guys lose a game due to bad officiating and it’s like ‘so what?’ they have 115 games a season to make up for it. But with these guys you aren’t just affecting their pay or their record, you are affecting their legacy. This is how these fighters are going to be remembered by history.” Continue reading »
