Scoring debate mars terrific title fight
Main event goes to a decision, which is always a recipe for controversy
Robbie Lawler has always been an entertaining fighter, but since he’s ascended into the championship picture in the UFC welterweight division, the veteran southpaw has had a penchant for engaging in instant classics. Saturday night was no different. At UFC 195, Lawler and Carlos Condit squared off in a battle for the welterweight strap and it was even better than expected. On one hand, it was technical and tactical, with both fighters picking their spots. At the same time, it was violent and furious, with Condit constantly attacking with combinations and Lawler charging forward with power in the final round, looking to finish, many believing he needed to in order to retain his title.
He didn’t, on both fronts. Condit weathered the storm, the fight went to the scorecards and Lawler got the nod, earning a split-decision win to collect his second successful title defence and continue his reign over the 170-pound ranks.
However, many questioned the decision, with the scoring of the pivotal third round coming under heavy scrutiny. The debate about the outcome instantly overshadowed the excellence of the contest, as the conversation shifted from the classic battle that just played out to the ongoing issues that plague mixed martial arts judging.
Everyone’s definition of “effective striking” is different and the weight they attribute to each landed strike varies. Despite Condit outlanding Lawler in the deciding middle frame, two of the three judges awarded the round to the champion, apparently giving more weight to the few powerful strikes Lawler connected with over the challenger landing at a higher clip — but with less pop — and pressing forward for the majority of the round.
Beyond the scoring of the third round Saturday, the result of the UFC 195 main event — and a couple other fights on the card — highlights the larger issue of using a system adopted from boxing years ago as a means of determining the outcome of an entirely different sport.
It’s been apparent for years that the 10-point must system is flawed, yet little has been done to try to improve on it. That needs to change.
Great fights shouldn’t be marred by suspect decisions, fighters shouldn’t be afraid to go the distance and 10-9 shouldn’t be the score assigned to the vast majority of rounds, especially considering how distinctly different rounds often receive the same score.
In Saturday’s championship fight, the pivotal, closely-contested swing round and the final frame where Lawler nearly put Condit away were both scored 10-9 by all three judges — and that’s a big part of the problem.
It’s time for everyone in the MMA world — the organizations, the athletic commissions, the officials, the media — to band together to find a solution. Otherwise we’ll keep finding ourselves in this same position, debating scoring and criticizing judges instead of talking about a terrific championship fight.
E. Spencer Kyte is the author of Keyboard Kimura (theprovince. com/mmablog), the MMA blog of The Province. Follow him on social media: @spencerkyte.