Scoring and controversy go hand in hand in MMA. The sport is still relatively new, and tons of decisions over the years have left the fans divided, enraged, and dissatisfied, among other things.
From Dominick Reyes losing against Jon Jones to Paddy Pimblett getting the nod against Jared Gordon, there are countless examples of controversial MMA decisions. Such incidents can occur at an amateur event as well as during a UFC title fight, which explains why the MMA community expects the scoring system to get more objective.
Georges St-Pierre vs. Johny Hendricks is easily one of the most questioned decisions ever, and Marc Goddard broke it down to explain how scorecards in MMA can vary greatly...
Marc Goddard Reveals Unnoticed Factor That Made Georges St-Pierre vs. Johny Hendricks A Split Decision From Unanimous
Goddard recently appeared on the talkSPORT MMA YouTube channel to deliver a masterclass on MMA scoring. When asked about judges having contradictory scorecards after a fight, the renowned referee brought up GSP's last defense of the UFC welterweight title before leaving the sport temporarily.
Goddard started by explaining that 15 scores had to be submitted by three judges across the five rounds between St-Pierre and Hendricks. Fourteen of these 15 scorecards were identical. One judge scored the first round for Hendricks, which turned the majority decision into a split one.
It's perfectly understandable why he scored it that way because if you look at the fight and you'll see there's a certain point in the first round when Johny's against the cage. He's defending a double leg, George is in on a double with him and he throws a series of elbows and you know yourself, being elbowed in the head is not a nice experience and depending on what's between your ears, that can make a hollow sound or a dull sound. But you look, it was a series of elbows, he was physically marked up by them. And if you look, go back and watch that fight, and as you see those elbows come in, who's the judge that sat right underneath where they're happening, Nelson 'Doc' Hamilton. And he saw something which was used in his. It was a close round, but at that point, it was enough to swing him.
Goddard pointed out that the judge who scored the first round for Hendricks (the ref says it's Nelson Hamilton mistakenly, but it was Glenn Trowbridge) was seated right next to the fighters during the sequence when "Big Rig" landed some vicious elbows on GSP while defending a double leg. According to the referee, the impact of these elbows would've been obvious to one judge in a way it wasn't for the other two.
By using this example, Goddard wanted to point out how real-time scoring is very different from what the fans see. Based on their sitting position, all judges get a different viewing angle and hear differently which naturally affects their decisions.
The acclaimed MMA figure further explained that in contrast to popular understanding, a split decision signifies a close fight. However, because fans have usually placed bets and they're very passionate about their favorites, split decisions are often instantly seen as robberies.
There's so many factors that come into play when you're looking at MMA, not just on the highest level. This is regardless of level. There's so many factors, line of site, your view, how you hear things, how you see things, etc," Goddard continued, "You know, obviously, if you're cut or swollen during the fight, the judges can see it. All these factors mate and it's so like, like I said when the public jump on something because of it's something they heard and obviously all their misunderstanding on top of that, it just snowballs and exasperates it. And it's mindblowing!
By bringing up several minor factors that MMA fans ignore as viewers, Goddard aimed to highlight how likely it is for scorecards to be different, especially in close fights. However, the popular sentiment is that scorecards should be unanimous in most cases and a split decision means that at least one judge got it wrong.