BIGGEST ROBBERIES IN UFC HISTORY

Are you ******* kidding me?

Where does Mighty Mouse vs. McCall rank in biggest robberies in UFC history? I think it just might be the biggest.

I think it's bigger than Zombie vs. Garcia and Phan vs. Garcia.

You are a clown, I don't feel like arguing with idiots right now. -thanks for the offer though.

* Edited at 03.02.2012, 11:28 PM ET *

@adoseofbuckley I realize that you aren't talking to me right now, but fights should be judged as a whole. Not necessarily on a round system. Volume of strikes doesn't necessarily mean anything if the other guy landed quite a few more significant strikes that did a lot more damage.

Because you can't. Provide a legitimate and reasonable alternative to how fights are currently scored, instead of name-calling.

Hybrid: I wasn't but I appreciate an actual answer, and it's an open board so you're welcome to participate. Since that's not the current system though, it doesn't matter if a guy barely squeaks by winning 2 out of 3 rounds while another guy dominates a round (but not enough to get a 10-8, and even in that case it would be a draw), so there's no sense in saying "that's ********!" every time someone loses a close fight on the current system.

@Messiah sorry but your wrong, this was a much bigger robbery when you take into account what was on the line. Garcia vs Phan I & Garcia vs Jung ! were obviously no where near title implications, McCall vs MM was much more significant and therefore a much bigger robbery. There was just to much on the line for UC to not even be given the sudden death round the UFC was using for this tourney.

ADoseofBuckley, the first round of Kampmann-ALves is a good example, the only significant strike landed that round was by Kampmann the front kick that rung Alves bell and lead to the subsequent takedown. while I am sure that Alves landed more strikes that round, i feel that Kampmanns front kick and the takedowns won him that round.

Lopati: I appreciate the idea behind that but so you're saying if a guy lands 20 punches in a round, and another guy lands one kick and a takedown, one kick and a takedown wins because the kick was harder? I know this isn't the olympics but I've never seen a system like that. I'll agree a better, more universal scoring system needs to be put in place for MMA, but I don't believe that's it either.

I'm trying not to argue, but just to keep you semi-grounded in reality; the current score system doesn't say the fighter who lands more strikes -wins. If you would have read my posts before getting argumentative over it you woulda seen I only meant that the percentages of strikes don't always tell the whole story.

* Edited at 03.02.2012, 11:47 PM ET *

Brad: I understand scoring systems, I boxed for years. Again, you're just inciting arguments by being condescending ("to keep you semi-grounded in reality"). Once again you offer no alternatives. You clearly don't want to actually have a discussion about this, you just want to be mad about a fight on the internet. Make sure you downvote this comment though as well, because it makes so much difference...

Really, trying not to argue here but you started being condescending with the fan boys comment. Remember? I wasn't talking about amending the scoring/judging system either. I simply wasn't looking for an argument, so just relax alright.

* Edited at 03.02.2012, 11:53 PM ET *

ADose, if the kick did significantly more damage than the 20 punches than yes I would say it won.  this isn't olympic boxing where volume means more damage.  In my mind a fight is to determine damage inflicted over the course of 15/25 minutes.  this is why i rank finishers above decisioners and this is why I would have scored the first round for Kampmann, Alves was visibly incoherent from the kick, which lead to the takedown.  I never saw kampmann rocked like that in the first round.  so 10-9 Kampmann on damage inflicted over volume.

one kick and a scramble was why I scored the 2nd round for henderson over edgar.  the up kick was the most significant strike of the round.  I am not saying that every time this is true either, each fight is different but in this particular case this is my stance

@lopati I agree that damage should definitely be a major criterion for judging, but it can't be the be-all-end-all. I'll use Chael vs. Anderson as an example. Had the fight gone to the decision, Chael clearly should have won. However, Anderson had magically done more damage to Chael. 

@hybrid Not magic. It was an elbow. LOL.

By the 10 point must system, I don't think a 29-28 card for Johnson is unreasonable, but that really just illustrates the problem with the 10 point must system in MMA. 

Lopati: Well I have to disagree, if a finisher can't finish then he's not a finisher. We do however agree that we both prefer finishers (who doesn't?)

If Kampmann was to lose the first round on the cards, it doesn't matter anyway because he finished Alvez anyway, and no matter what the scoring system, it doesn't matter. HOWEVER, I suppose technically if it was scored the way boxing matches are scored, a knockout would count (Pro Boxing matches aren't scored on volume, if you get out-pointed in a round but you drop your opponent, you win the round). But then that doesn't work taking takedowns into consideration (so a guy lands 20 punches but the other guy lands a takedown, takedown better not win over punch volume, but how often have we seen lay-and-pray win?). A better scoring system needs to be put in place for MMA, something mathematical that weighs knockdowns, takedowns, strikes in specific areas... that's the only way to do it (but then people will exploit it)

Well breaking news on Twitter is the McCall/Johnson fight was a draw, and apparently Buffer just read it wrong!!

Actually the commissioner is the one who gave buffer the wrong info. It's hard to believe that he read the one judges number incorrectly... This is pathetic now they have to fight again all because of a person not paying attention.

* Edited at 03.03.2012, 12:06 AM ET *

Rorschach - Then wasn't it supposed to go to the sudden death 4th round? Or was that only supposed to be for the finals? I was under the impression it was meant for the entire tournament.

Yes it was supposed to go to a fourth round. Problem is now though they are gonna have to do the entire fight all over again. According to DANA just now during the post fight presser.