What is a UFC "Robbery" where you think the judges were actually right.

Jones CLEARLY beat Gus.

A lot of times you see close fights get called robberies in the moment but then when people go back and watch them and truly analyze them, most of the time the come around and agree with the judging.
 
What is a robbery that you think either wasn't a robbery or was closer than people think.

I'm gonna go first with GSP vs Hendricks. That fight was actually extremely close when you look at the score cards and it literally could have went either way. I feel people think it was a robbery more do to the fact that Hendricks was his hardest fight and won his rounds more convincingly.
http://ufcstats.com/fight-details/7ff036c99621eb1c

GSP won 3 and 5 convincingly and Hendricks won 2 and 4 pretty convincingly (although 2 wHe as very close but I gave it to Hendricks because he wobbled Georges)
It only came down to the first round where the stats were almost exactly even except GSP had a submission attempt so I honestly would either give the round to GSP or make it a Draw.

Name some fights you think were not really a robbery but others do.
Hendricks vs GSP was a robbery. Johny won 1,2,4. The first round Hendricks caught GSP with those elbows that were by far the most significant strikes of the round. He also landed a nice knee on George. George didn't really land anything significant in the round.
 
Last edited:
Hendricks vs GSP was a robbery. Johny won 1,3,5. The first round Hendricks caught GSP with those elbows that were by far the most significant strikes of the round. He also landed a nice knee on George. George didn't really land anything significant in the round.

Far from a robbery though, some people feel GSP got the first round, some feel Hendricks did. In no way was it a robbery. It all comes down to who you think won the first round.
 
Far from a robbery though, some people feel GSP got the first round, some feel Hendricks did. In no way was it a robbery. It all comes down to who you think won the first round.
"Worst decision ever"........Carlos Condit
(?).........Nate Diaz
"GSP gets that decision but that's insane! Hendricks won that fight"..........Sarah Kaufman
"What a joke. A fucking joke. NSAC should be disgusted."........Michael Chiesa
"I had Hendricks winning 3-2"........Cub Swanson
"The worst decision in UFC history. Good thing GSP doesn't remember much of it.".......Trevor Smith

https://www.mmafighting.com/2020/11...orges-st-pierre-vs-johny-hendricks-at-ufc-167

Media scores had 16 votes for Hendricks winning 48-47 and nobody in the media thought GSP won.
http://mmadecisions.com/decision/4707/Georges-St-Pierre-vs-Johny-Hendricks
 
GSP vs Hendricks indeed.

It's either GSP 1,3,5, or a draw in which Georges keeps the belt.

Casuals are just mad because GSP had more bruises, but he's always bruised very easily... if we judge fights on that criteria, then he also lost against Condit, Shields, Diaz and Penn...

Came here to say the same thing, but Condit actually knocked Georges down, something Juice Hendricks never did. GSP said that was his toughest fight to win.
He did say that, and it's understandable since he was almost KO'd, but when it comes to citing his toughest fights, GSP often changes his answer.

Most recently (a 2022 interview), he was saying that BJ Penn in their first fight was his toughest opponent...

back in 2018, he said his toughest opponent was Bisping, and the first Penn fight was his toughest... but he also listed the Carlos Condit fight as his toughest in term of damage =>


But in 2011 on his official facebook page, he's also said that Jake Shields was his toughest opponent, not Penn. And in another interview, he listed Jon Fitch as his toughest opponent, saying he kept coming back like the Terminator and all.

Georges is one of these guys who seemingly likes to give all of his opponents credit, but Penn and Condit often come up as answers to his toughest opponents
“Penn and Condit,” St-Pierre said. “Condit hurt me the most, and then it was mentally a challenge, and Penn also hurt me. People think Hendricks was the toughest, but against Hendricks I was emotionally hurt, that’s what showed on my face. The next day physically I was fine. Against Hendricks I felt I was against the system. I felt the system was corrupted against me, like Dana White was for some reason against me, and I didn’t understand why; I was not trying to put the UFC down, but to bring ‘em up. When I spoke before the fight I wanted to help the sport, I wanted to help the UFC, so that’s what showed, what was emotionally, mentally in my head. I felt the system was against me and I didn’t understand why.”

I also recall him saying that Dan Hardy was the toughest he ever fought... speaking of, this fight of the 2 of them breaking their fight down is fantastic

They had a really nice discussion, and explain a lot of stuff

Bisping didnt have any hatred until he got that decision though.Like that shit was his fault somehow.

Same w Machida and Shogun.

Exactly, I've always said that Bisping and Machida would be waaaaay more popular here had they admitted that those fights were close, instead of just saying, in Lyoto's case: "I was superior, I almost finished Rua 4 times, the judges said I won, so I won!"
Lemme find the exact quote... there it is!
“Shogun was a great opponent and had a nice strategy. He deserves all my respect as a fighter, but I was superior. I had three or four chances to finish the fight, and he never put me in danger. I didn’t get (dazed) at any moment of the fight, but I put him in danger three or four times. He kicked my legs a couple of times, but he wouldn’t knock me out with that.”Machida guaranteed that his disappointed expression immediately after the fight did not stem from a belief that he had lost.

“My leg started to hurt in the fifth round, and I was very upset that I couldn’t knock him out as I had planned,” Machida said. “I had two chances where I felt him really (dazed), but I lost it and I get really upset when I leave the decision in the judges’ hands.”

After confirming that he totally agrees with a rematch, Machida also addressed UFC President Dana White’s statement that he thought Shogun was the winner.

“Anyone who has a mouth can talk. I respect his opinion and I’m ready to fight Shogun or any other challenger UFC decides, but I would like to say that this fight was not judged by myself, my father or Anderson Silva,” Machida said. “This fight was judged by professionals, so I’m pretty much comfortable with the result.”
"Go make some fans, RYOTO" <6>

Karma was pretty bad in that case, as Lyoto was pissed when the judges gave Phil Davis the victory over him
"I really don't know what they are judging, Just listen to the crowd. They're telling you what is happening."
<bball2>


Shogun/Machida 1 is still historic in the sense that it was the first UFC title fight for which the judges were actively hunted down and asked to justify their bullshit... which led to the infamous "I don't score low kicks because they don't win fights" from Cecil Peoples.
 
What is a robbery that you think either wasn't a robbery or was closer than people think.

I'm gonna go first with GSP vs Hendricks. That fight was actually extremely close when you look at the score cards and it literally could have went either way. I feel people think it was a robbery more do to the fact that Hendricks was his hardest fight and won his rounds more convincingly.
http://ufcstats.com/fight-details/7ff036c99621eb1c

GSP won 3 and 5 convincingly and Hendricks won 2 and 4 pretty convincingly (although 2 was very close but I gave it to Hendricks because he wobbled Georges)
It only came down to the first round where the stats were almost exactly even except GSP had a submission attempt so I honestly would either give the round to GSP or make it a Draw.

Name some fights you think were not really a robbery but others do.

Paddy vs. Gordon. They each took a round a piece going into the third. Gordon does absolutely nothing but try to control Paddy, doesn't even try to do damage or attempt a sub. By the rules, he gets 0 points for that round. Paddy was at least striking from the bottom and trying to do a bit of damage when he could. They got the round scoring wrong, but the overall fight correct. Round 3 should have been a Paddy round.
 
I still laugh at the fake contraversy of Volk vs Holloway 2 and Volk vs Makh. The right calls were made in both and the contraversy in both fights are completely manufactured. Especially Volk vs Holloway 2. Nobody would think that was a robbery if Bisping shut his mouth.

<28>
 
Paddy pimblet won his fight easily. Just a bunch of millennial and gen z Ariel fanboys. Can’t believe how easily he’s turned the fans against paddy.


No he didn't he lost the first two clearly at least.
 
"Worst decision ever"........Carlos Condit
(?).........Nate Diaz
"GSP gets that decision but that's insane! Hendricks won that fight"..........Sarah Kaufman
"What a joke. A fucking joke. NSAC should be disgusted."........Michael Chiesa
"I had Hendricks winning 3-2"........Cub Swanson
"The worst decision in UFC history. Good thing GSP doesn't remember much of it.".......Trevor Smith

https://www.mmafighting.com/2020/11...orges-st-pierre-vs-johny-hendricks-at-ufc-167

Media scores had 16 votes for Hendricks winning 48-47 and nobody in the media thought GSP won.
http://mmadecisions.com/decision/4707/Georges-St-Pierre-vs-Johny-Hendricks



Wow really? Hmm. Makes me wanna rewatch the fight.
 
Yan vs omailly... yan won by the rules but fuck that he got beat the fuck up by omailly and panic wrestled to win rounds.
 
Sanchez VS Kampmann, Davis VS Machida, Sterling VS Yan 2, Cejudo VS DJ 2, Nunes VS Shevchenko 2, Penn VS GSP 1, Penn VS Edgar 1
 
- Condit vs Diaz - clear cut decision win for a cautious Condit which is why people were butthurt
- Sanchez vs Kampmann - People focused way too much on the blood. Kampmann got rocked multiple times and IMO clearly took the more significant damage (despite the image of the blood). Martin had a habit of blowing it
- Any of the recent Sterling fights. Yan has horrible fight IQ and always expects to rally for a late finish and then is shocked when he loses on points
- Rampage vs Machida. Felt like such an easy matchup for textbook Machida but he fought way out of character and lost a lackluster decision
- Anderson vs Bisping. One of the most frustrating performances ever and Anderson did virtually nothing besides the flying knee. He should have retired after this abomination.
Agreed with Kampmann / Sanchez -- folks tend to focus on technique which is cute and all, but technique doesn't always equate to effectiveness. As sloppy as Sanchez was, he roughed up Kampmann in rounds 2 and 3 enough to get the nod in my opinion. It wasn't dominant, but I feel the right man won.
 
Glad to see someone else saw it this way. 29-28 Moraes. Aldo couldn’t cut the cage and everyone perceived that him “pressing forward” was enough to win the round.
I thought it was a bad decision when I watched it live, but then I rewatched and felt that Moraes actually won the fight.
 
The Rampage and Machida and Silva VS Bisping were the first that came to mind for me as well. Machida owned the third round, but did nothing in the first two hence why Rampage got the nod.
Yeah the Rampage / Machida one was kinda funny -- I didn't really think it was a robbery, but Rampage said after the fight that he even thought Machida won. I found it commendable, but I was like "don't sell yourself short, man" haha
 
This will be an unpopular opinion, but in fights this close nobody should win. There should at least be an extra round or something so this shit wouldn't happen all the time. There should NEVER be a split decision, that shit is ridiculous.
 
Back
Top