Top 5 Controversial Decisions in UFC History

There are few sports more defined by their unpredictability than mixed martial arts (better known as MMA), particularly in the Ultimate Fighting Championship realm. Although much of the sport is settled within its octagon, judges’ scorecards serve as a second battlefront in these immortal cases, and their results do not infrequently spark an age-old war on talk shows like UFC Tonight. Throughout the years, a number of UFC fights have been decided by controversial decisions, and this has led many people to review what factors judges consider in scoring, their implementation of the 10-point must system, and controversy about how fair or even-handed things actually are. What are the top five most controversial decisions in UFC history, and what happened after those fights—both inside and outside of the octagon?

Georges St-Pierre vs. Johny Hendricks (UFC 167)

The Fight
Georges St-Pierre (GSP) vs. Johny Hendricks (UFC 167, Nov. 16}) St-Pierre was a dominant champion, known for his complete game and versatility, while Hendricks had his wrestling skills combined with amazing knockout power. It was a highly anticipated bout, with many predicting it to be close and competitive.

The Controversy
The bout was everything that it promised to be, with both fighters having their moments there. Hendricks connected some significant strikes and won a number of grappling exchanges; even so, St-Pierre managed to land enough to clearly cause considerable harm. Even though it looked like he had done more than enough to successfully defend his strap, St-Pierre was awarded a split decision win with judges’ scores of 48-47, 47-48, and 48-47.

The Fallout
The announcement was met with instant blowback from fans, fighters, and analysts alike, who thought that Hendricks had done more than enough to win the decision. UFC President Dana White was vocal, telling ESPN that the best commission in mixed martial arts didn’t do its job and calling for immediate updates to the judging system. The controversy opened up old debates about the 10-point must system and what is or isn’t a successful way to score fights, with one of the major arguments always being that damage counts more than control.

Lyoto Machida vs. Mauricio “Shogun” Rua (UFC 104)

The Fight
Better than most is UFC 104, where on October 24, 2009, Lyoto Machida defended his light heavyweight title against Mauricio “Shogun” Rua. The elusive karate-based style of Machida faced the aggressive striking and submissions of former PRIDE champion Shogun Rua.

The Controversy
Rua took the fight to Machida, and throughout their five-round bout, Rua was deeply effective in attacking Machida’s legs and body. Strikes landed clean against his foe, engulfing Rua’s win. Just about every single person watching believed Rua had done enough to take Machida’s belt. Machida, however, earned a unanimous-decision win on all three judges’ scorecards, 48-47 across the board.

The Fallout
The decision was much maligned in the court of public opinion, as numerous fans and media members outright stated that Rua rode to an improbable victory. The controversy sparked a rematch at UFC 113, in which Rua won by first-round knockout to become the undisputed light heavyweight champion. The controversy merely underscored mismatches between the judges, inconsistencies, and blurriness of scoring guidelines.

Michael Bisping vs. Matt Hamill (UFC 75)

The Fight
Michael Bisping vs. Matt Hamill at UFC 75 on September 8, 2007 (light heavyweight) Bisping was the home country favorite as he fought in England, and Hamill presented a formidable opponent with his wrestling background.

The Controversy
It was a closely contested bout, with Hamill leveraging his wrestling to dictate Bisping while also landing some strong shots. Nevertheless, Bisping was declared the winner after a split decision ruled 29-28, 28-29, and then finally 29-28 again.

The Fallout
It was an extremely divisive decision, with many feeling Hamill deserved the victory. Some felt the contentious nature may have been due to hometown bias in England. The controversy also demonstrated the inherent difficulty of scoring fights in which neither fighter destroys enough to proclaim a victor and raised further questions about perceived home-town bias in MMA.

Nick Diaz vs. Carlos Condit (UFC 143)

The Fight
February 4, 2012, Nick Diaz vs. Carlos Condit for the interim welterweight title (UFC 143) Diaz, who combines relentless pressure with slick boxing, goes against Condit, a versatile striker who has a reputation for finishing fights.

The Controversy
The fight served as a tactical showdown. Condit was on the run for much of the night, avoiding Diaz’s notorious pressure boxing while moving to catch him with counter punches. Diaz, a fan favorite who was the aggressor and in control of the center cage, was widely considered to have won scorecards based on that. Condit was declared the winner via unanimous decision (48-47, 49-46, and 49-46).

The Fallout
There was much outcry at the decision, with many believing that Diaz, due to his constant pressure, should have taken it. That controversy certainly underscored the fact that scoring is an inherently subjective component of this violent sport, especially when one tries to balance aggression with effective striking. Diaz also briefly retired due to a lack of big fights, but later came back.

Dominick Reyes vs. Jon Jones (UFC 247)

The Fight
Jon Jones defended his light heavyweight title against Dominick Reyes on Feb. 8, 2020, at UFC 247. Reyes brought knockout power as well as athleticism to the game, making him a dangerous threat against Jones, one of the greatest fighters ever.

The Controversy
Reyes looked fierce early, taking the first two rounds with strong striking and good movement. Jones, who has been flexible as a fighter through the years, dug in to win the later rounds. Jones took home the unanimous decision victory with scores of 48-47, 48-47, and a bafflingly lopsided card at 49-46, despite Reyes taking him to the brink in one of his most fan-friendly starts.

The Fallout
The scoring was quickly scrutinized, as a large contingent of fans and analysts felt Reyes captured the first three rounds to earn victory. The 49-46 card, in particular, was criticized. The controversy rekindled dissatisfaction with the scoring system, what to look for in a routine, and how much of it should be seen.

The Impact of Controversial Decisions on MMA

Changes in Judging and Scoring
Controversial decisions have prompted calls for reform in judging and scoring. Proposals have included:

Open Scoring: After each round, the judge’s score will be revealed to ensure fighters have a more transparent picture of how they are performing throughout the fight.
Judging Education: Better development in the expanse of training for judges in MMA techniques and strategies.
Unified rules modifications: restructuring the clear explanation of damage, control, and aggression in the scoring criteria for MMA.

Fighter Reactions and Career Trajectories

Controversial decisions can significantly impact fighters’ careers, influencing their:
Record and Legacy: A controversial loss or win can affect a fighter’s record and their legacy in the sport.
Title Opportunities: Controversial decisions can delay or expedite title shots and rematches.
Public Perception: Fans’ and analysts’ perceptions of fighters can be shaped by controversial outcomes, affecting their popularity and marketability.

Fan engagement and interest
Yes, contentious calls can be annoying, but they also add to the storylines and juicy narratives that keep us hooked. Fans debate and go back and forth regarding these decisions, falling deeper into the UFC narrative.

In combat sports, controversies regarding decisions are a dime in the dozen, and there have been plenty for us to form a juicy Top-20 of them just considering everyone that occurred inside the UFC. They are decisions that typically generate the most controversy and act as a reminder of just how messy MMA judging can be. This has been a point of contention for the entirety of Strikeforce/UFC since Zuffa’s reign, and while changes can be made to address some problems, judging will always remain subjective. How these seriously contested decisions come about helps to illustrate the inherent difficulties of assessing MMA and how it all serves as a reminder for what needs continued work on judging and scoring in our sport. As the UFC continues its evolution, these debates will continue to live on as an important piece of a vibrant and ever-growing legacy.