Was the wrong decision made at UFC 123?
At the conclusion of the main event bout at UFC 123 between Quinton “Rampage” Jackson and Lyoto Machida, I sat wondering how could two judges get this decision so wrong? I thought clearly Machida won the first and third rounds and Rampage took the second round.
The last time I felt a fight was so wrongfully decided, was the Machida-Rua 1 bout at UFC 104.
At the end of a close bout, most fighters believe they should get the edge. But, clearly Rampage knew he had lost this fight. Every ounce of his body language expressed those feelings at the end of the fight. He sat against the cage, like a whipped fighter with his head down. So it was to his dismay that ring announcer Bruce Buffer would call his name at the end as the winner. His first words to analyst Joe Rogan were, “He bloody my nose, I consider that a [expletive] whipping,” said Jackson.
He later changed his opinion when his corner men “yes men” told him he had won the bout. And later UFC president Dana White chimed in declaring Rampage the winner.
Now I know judges are human just like you and I. And the mere definition of the word judge means implies that an opinion will be given.Here are my thoughts on why the decision was made in Rampage’s favor.
It starts with Steven Seagal. That’s right, the action movie star Steven Seagal, who is a 7th-dan black belt in aikido. The 58-year-old actor worked with Machida for the fight with Rampage. If you look at the techniques on youtube he taught Machida. And you hear Rampage at the UFC 123 post-fight press conference; you could see that Machida was doing some moves in the cage that could be misconstrued as boring. Jackson said, “Even though he [Machida] was elusive and everything but it really made for an exciting fight I think. I remember trying to punch him and he was already on this side over here [pointing to his side]. I was thinking like man you know what I’m saying, it’s weird; I think his style, I got more respect for his style … I won’t want to watch though.”
I think as a fighter, Rampage realized that what Machida was doing was such a beautiful art form of fighting. Being elusive and not taking punishment can be mistaking as boring. But it’s the opposite of what Dana White would want for a UFC fight. He pays bonuses for toe-to-toe fighting. Taking punches in the face and afflicting as much damage to your opponent as possible. The “Fight of the Night” consists of very little defense and all out punching with your opponent.
My point: If you look at the first round, Machida had octagon control and effective aggressiveness as defined by the scoring rules.
Octagon Control
1. The fighter who is dictating the pace, place and position of the fight.
2. A striker who fends off a grappler's takedown attempt to remain standing and effectively strike is octagon control.
3. A grappler who can take down an effective standing striker to ground fight is octagon control.
4. The fighter on the ground who creates submission, mount or clean striking opportunities.
Effective Aggressiveness
1. This simply means who is moving forward and finding success.
2. Throwing a strike moving backwards is not as effective as a strike thrown moving forward. (Neither)
3. Throwing strikes and not landing is not effective aggressiveness.
4. Moving forward and getting struck is not effective aggressiveness.
5. Shooting takedowns and getting countered and fended off is not effective aggressiveness.
What are your thoughts?
Kevin Richardson has been a fan of mixed martial arts competition ever since UFC 3, when 600-pound sumo wrestler Emmanuel Yarborough was beaten by Keith Hackney. Kevin will cover the world of MMA — in Baltimore, nationally and internationally. He plans to take readers into the locker rooms and MMA schools, where they'll hear from local fighters and trainers. If you have a news tip or suggestions for the blog, please 
Comments
I disagree, I think Rampage CLEARLY had the first two rounds. Machida did not do nothing much but dodge until the third round.
Posted by: andy augustus | November 23, 2010 11:32 AM
I also had rampage winning the first two rounds. Not by a lot, but he was moving forward and attacking. Machida didn't do anything until the third round.
I think that the media likes to say something was "close call" or "bad decision" when they obviously weren't just because a majority of the fans are too stupid t watch and make their own educated thoughts (Example : Penn Edgar 1 wasn't a close fight, nor was Griffin Ortiz 2)
Posted by: Zachery | November 23, 2010 12:03 PM
I also disagree. Machida's style is draw back and reverse, its extremely risky for a judges decision cause he doesn't control the pace, he backs away and wait for a chance to counter attack. I do believe that the match should have been ruled a draw though. It was to close to give a clear winner
Posted by: John Flores | November 23, 2010 12:27 PM
the main dispute is about the first round which i cant see why. rampage was the one pushing forward now while machida managed to dodge pretty much all of his strikes (except for an overhand right that clipped machida on the top of his head) machida did no damage of his own he only really land a couple of leg strike and a leg kick to the body. on the other hand in the clinch which was the area that won him the first round in the clinch rampage land foot stomps, knees to the thighs, punches to the body and a nice upper cut on the way out (with 1:57 on the clock) and again he kept pushing forward so all this adds up to a 10-9 round for rampage
Posted by: Aldo | November 23, 2010 12:38 PM
I disagree with you as well. I thought Rampage clearly dictated to Machida in Rounds 1 & 2. Rampage was the aggressor in both rounds (overall), with Machida fighting defensively. Both rounds were very close, IMO, but I can't fault the judges for giving them to Rampage. Simply put, Machida did less than Rampage did to win those first two rounds. So I had no problem with the decision.
Posted by: Bill Drain | November 23, 2010 1:08 PM
hi,
i totally agree with your opinion. having watched all UFC bouts and knowing the fighters, i expected a KO, not sure why.. probably because of the hype before the fight.
anyway, i remember watching it and i would have bet my house [ which i don't have :) ] at the end of the 3 rounds that machida had won 2:1
..and i think the rampage’s reaction confirms that.
hey, on the other hand "don't leave it in the hand of the judges" as dana always says - probably there was too much on the table, thus they didn’t risk certain moves.
i hope rampage gets bones jones. :)
Marius,
I hope he get Bones Jones as well -Kevin
Posted by: marius bandy | November 23, 2010 1:37 PM
Machida won the fight in my opinion, just like Rampage said he took a whooping and Rampage indeed took far more damage than Machida, i think a rematch will be great considering both fighters will now know a great deal more about each others game and be more inclined to engage!
Posted by: David | November 23, 2010 1:43 PM
Machida artfully evaded for the first two rounds. But who wants to watch a guy who just evades for ten minutes?
Sometimes it's easier to counter attack than to initiate attacks. But fans don't want to watch competitors spending most of their time just circling each other, waiting for an opening.
The judges were smart to award the decision to Rampage. He was the aggressor for the first two rounds.
Posted by: Kevin Kane | November 23, 2010 2:04 PM
I'm a fan of Machida and his style but I believe he lost the fight (the way its judge). Machida easily did the most damage, but Rampage won the 1st two rounds in my eye because he moved forward and leaned on Machida against the fence... and thats really all you have to do to have "control". As a judge, I would have scored rounds 1 and 2 as 10-10. I mean neither of them honestly won the round, but if you HAD to pick a winner, it was probably Rampage.
I think the worst decision of UFC 123 was made after the fight. I was a big fan of both Lauzon and George S., I love great ground games. I felt the winner of that deserved A LOT better than fighting D.Siver. When Kenny Florian beat Joe Stevenson and J-Lo, he got BJ. George gets Siver?? I mean what more does to have to do to receive a decent fighter? Maybe all the top talent was booked up, but George really would give also anyone at 155 a scare. Lauzon was known for his ground game and George easily passed to North South control and submitted him.
Last thing... PLEASE BJ PLEASE beat Jon Fitch. I just hate that style of fighting and I hope someone brings a gameplan to stop it. People are complaining about Machida's style should really be upset at guys who just lay there on the guy for 15 min. Elusiveness is actually a beautiful skill... Look at Silva and even Mayweather from boxing (even his elusiveness from fighting Manny lol)... when its done right, its very effective and not boring whatsoever.
Phi, Thanks for your post -Kevin
Posted by: Phi | November 23, 2010 2:10 PM
rampage clearly won the first 2 rounds- i thought dana white would cut machida after the first 2 rounds of running- it looked like a younger brother having to fight his older brother and trying to act brave but knowing if he catches me its over- the third round machida won with the late flurrly whe he caight quinton off guard- maybe if machida did that all 3 rounds but he didnt,
Posted by: julian | November 23, 2010 2:12 PM
Wow. I completely disagree! Machida was just being defensive the first 2 rounds. It is clear that Rampage won the first 2 rounds,and the last one to Machida.
Posted by: Jeremy | November 23, 2010 2:16 PM
I think Machida won the fight, but Rampage won the show. If they'd met outside the Octagon, for whatever reason, and decided to throw down, then this was Machida's fight. I even think that based on scoring - I know Compustrike shows an advantage for Rampage, but there's strikes and then there's strikes - Machida won. But it was very close. Maybe this was the judges' way of "getting Lyoto back" for his controversial decision win against Rua last year?
Posted by: Frans Koster | November 23, 2010 8:30 PM