rockzavin
Super Moderator
- May 16, 2024
- 323
- 27
Fighters, analysts, and fans contested the recent clash between Alex Pereira and Magomed Ankalaev. Some wondered whether the judges got it right with back-and-forth action, controversial scoring, and moments that could have tilted the fight either way.
The dust settled, and reactions poured in from social media. The MMA community split over the official result. Critiques of bad judging, bias, and inconsistent scoring dominated discussions, and many wondered whether the UFC's scoring system needed reforming.
Plinio Cruz and Glover Teixeira spoke on Wednesday on Pereira's YouTube page about the result, saying their fighter was superior in rounds one, three, and five. Three judges gave "Poatan" the first edge, and one judge gave him the fifth. On every official scorecard, Ankalaev won the third round 10-9.
Pereira complained about Ankalaev's strategy after the fight, saying judges shouldn't reward a fighter who hangs onto his opponents for most of a round. However, he has yet to watch the battle to weigh in on the decision.
A round-by-round analysis showed inconsistencies in the weighting of aggression, control time, and effective striking. Some argued that Pereira's striking should have been more significant, while others believed Ankalaev’s wrestling and cage control dictated the pace of the fight.
Many analysts pointed out that the judging criteria in MMA often lead to unpredictable results, fueling the ongoing debate about scoring reform.
Social media platforms exploded with fan reactions, with many calling it one of the most controversial decisions in recent memory. Hashtags questioning the legitimacy of MMA judging trended worldwide, and fight breakdown videos appeared, revealing different perspectives on who won the bout.
Analysts dissected the fight to pinpoint moments that may have influenced the judges. Many said the scoring system puts too much emphasis on control time rather than damage and that judging is inconsistent across events.
A big problem with MMA judging is the inconsistent application of these criteria. In some fights, you control time, while in others, you receive damage. This inconsistency has led to calls for changes in the scoring of fights—either open scoring or clearly defined judging criteria.
The victory keeps Ankalaev in the title picture, but the fight controversy may shadow his win. And Pereira will probably push for a rematch or another big fight to reclaim his spot as a contender.
As the UFC continues to evolve, one thing remains certain: MMA judging will continue to be a topic of debate until clear solutions are implemented.
Ankalaev won by split decision, but the result was highly controversial.
Why was the Pereira vs. Ankalaev decision controversial?
Many fans and analysts felt the judges scored the fight inconsistently. It led to debates over whether Ankalaev should have won based on control time or if Pereira's striking was more effective.
Was the fight rigged?
There is no evidence that judges rigged the fight, but the decision has fueled discussions about flaws in MMA judging.
The dust settled, and reactions poured in from social media. The MMA community split over the official result. Critiques of bad judging, bias, and inconsistent scoring dominated discussions, and many wondered whether the UFC's scoring system needed reforming.
Fight Recap: Key Moments
Magomed Ankalaev defeated Alex Pereira and claimed the UFC light heavyweight title in UFC 313 at T-Mobile Arena in Las Vegas on Saturday. Pereira was in control in the first round but appeared to fade as the fight went on, while Ankalaev was picking up steam in a unanimous decision win. Ankalaev has lost 14 consecutive fights.Plinio Cruz and Glover Teixeira spoke on Wednesday on Pereira's YouTube page about the result, saying their fighter was superior in rounds one, three, and five. Three judges gave "Poatan" the first edge, and one judge gave him the fifth. On every official scorecard, Ankalaev won the third round 10-9.
Pereira complained about Ankalaev's strategy after the fight, saying judges shouldn't reward a fighter who hangs onto his opponents for most of a round. However, he has yet to watch the battle to weigh in on the decision.
Judges' Scorecards Analysis
The official scorecards revealed a unanimous decision, with two judges favoring Ankalaev. Fans immediately questioned how the rounds were scored, particularly in moments where one fighter seemed to have a clear advantage.A round-by-round analysis showed inconsistencies in the weighting of aggression, control time, and effective striking. Some argued that Pereira's striking should have been more significant, while others believed Ankalaev’s wrestling and cage control dictated the pace of the fight.
Many analysts pointed out that the judging criteria in MMA often lead to unpredictable results, fueling the ongoing debate about scoring reform.
MMA Community Reactions
Fighters and analysts responded immediately. Some UFC veterans were frustrated by that decision and said Ankalaev should have won enough times to qualify. Others said Pereira struck harder and more deeply.Social media platforms exploded with fan reactions, with many calling it one of the most controversial decisions in recent memory. Hashtags questioning the legitimacy of MMA judging trended worldwide, and fight breakdown videos appeared, revealing different perspectives on who won the bout.
Analysts dissected the fight to pinpoint moments that may have influenced the judges. Many said the scoring system puts too much emphasis on control time rather than damage and that judging is inconsistent across events.
Understanding UFC’s Scoring System
Judges score MMA fights using the subjective 10-point must system. They give 10 points to the winner of a round and nine or fewer to the opponent for effective striking, grappling, aggression, and octagon control.A big problem with MMA judging is the inconsistent application of these criteria. In some fights, you control time, while in others, you receive damage. This inconsistency has led to calls for changes in the scoring of fights—either open scoring or clearly defined judging criteria.
What’s Next for Pereira and Ankalaev?
With such a controversial result comes the question of a rematch. Dana White has yet to confirm an immediate rematch, but given the backlash, the UFC may run it back to settle the debate once and for all.The victory keeps Ankalaev in the title picture, but the fight controversy may shadow his win. And Pereira will probably push for a rematch or another big fight to reclaim his spot as a contender.
As the UFC continues to evolve, one thing remains certain: MMA judging will continue to be a topic of debate until clear solutions are implemented.
Frequently Asked Questions
Who won the Pereira vs. Ankalaev fight?Ankalaev won by split decision, but the result was highly controversial.
Why was the Pereira vs. Ankalaev decision controversial?
Many fans and analysts felt the judges scored the fight inconsistently. It led to debates over whether Ankalaev should have won based on control time or if Pereira's striking was more effective.
Was the fight rigged?
There is no evidence that judges rigged the fight, but the decision has fueled discussions about flaws in MMA judging.
