# Top 5 Biggest Robberies in MMA History?



## Scout200 (Apr 27, 2010)

Most people know how sketchy the judging can be in MMA. In your opinion, what are the top five robberies in MMA history? What are some insane calls you can think of?

-Scout


----------



## sg160187 (Apr 11, 2010)

Machida vs shogun 1 - doesn't even need an explanation

Lil Nog vs Brilz - I thought Brilz all day long

They are the 2 that really stand out in my mind.


----------



## edlavis88 (Jul 12, 2009)

1. Randleman/Rutten
2. Brilz/Lil Nog
3. Machida/Shogun I
4. Hamill/Bisping
5. Tito/Belfort and Tito/Griffin

kamikaze145's pro debut :thumb02:


----------



## Hammerlock2.0 (Jun 17, 2009)

Rampage/Ninja
Everybody in the arena knew who won, even Rampage knew he lost.

Ricco/Nog
Ricco clearly won that fight.

Vitor/Tito
There's no way in hell Tito won that fight.

Hamill/Bisping
No need to elaborate.

BJ/Uno
BJ should have won that fight

Honorable mention: Shogun/Machida, Forrest/Rampage, Lidell/Bustamante, Henderson/Franklin

And for an honorary seed at the table - the guy who got a title shot because of bad decisions:
Grey Maynard/Roger Huerta
Grey Maynard/Nate Diaz


----------



## Terror Kovenant (Nov 16, 2008)

Henderson vs Franklin was the most blatant
Shogun vs Machida
Ninja vs Rampage
Bisping vs Hammil


----------



## Emericanaddict (Dec 31, 2006)

In no particular order.

Arona vs Fedor
Bisping vs Hammil
Ricco vs Nog
Machida vs Shogun 1
Forrest vs Tito 1
Many many Chris Lytle fights lol.


----------



## TraMaI (Dec 10, 2007)

I'd say Evan Dunham/Sean Sherk is up there. That shit was blatant.


----------



## TheJame (Sep 3, 2006)

My boy, Marky Mark Bocek getting the cold shoulder vs. Jim Miller. I think he did enough to win that fight, but those damn judges love Jim Miller and he loves them.


----------



## oldfan (Mar 14, 2010)

Hammerlock2.0 said:


> Rampage/Ninja
> Everybody in the arena knew who won, even Rampage knew he lost.
> 
> Ricco/Nog
> ...


I like your list the best except, I would replace Uno/Penn with Mezger/sakuraba.

And I would put Lidell/ Bustamante at the top. People really should watch that fight. Nothing like watching him get out kickboxed by a middleweight bjj guy to get a little perspective on the great Iceman.

Liddell won that fight for one reason only. It was 2 weeks after 9-11 and Bustamante isn't American. There would have been a riot if Bustamante won. I was embarrassed to be an American and a mma fan that day.

edit: I was there. I couldn't hear the decision over the chants of USA!


----------



## sNuFf_rEaLiTy (Feb 2, 2009)

Maybe everyone who got "robbed" should have finished their respective fights...?


----------



## swpthleg (Dec 31, 2006)

Is this UFC history, or MMA history?

If it's MMA history, I'll go with Fujii v Frausto.


----------



## spaulding91 (Sep 23, 2007)

sNuFf_rEaLiTy said:


> Maybe everyone who got "robbed" should have finished their respective fights...?


yes, because its that easy. Thats like expecting a touchdown every possesion in football.


----------



## jonnyg4508 (Jan 30, 2010)

Hamill/Bisping

As I can see this has the biggest concensus.


----------



## John8204 (May 13, 2010)

Jones/Hamill
Varner/Shalorus
Bisping/Hamill
Thomas/Serra
Diaz/Maynard


----------



## PheelGoodInc (Jul 23, 2009)

Hendo Franklin - absolute worst. Franklin easily won it.
Machida shogun
Belcher sexiama


----------



## Abrissbirne (Jul 4, 2010)

Never noticed that Cecil Peoples was one of the judges who scored the Hamill/Bisping bout.

Why is he even allowed to score at all?


----------



## Glothin (Jun 8, 2010)

*Lee Murray*

I am going to win this thread, hands down:

Lee Murray/Securitas Cash Management Lmt, February 21, 2006,
53 million British Pounds


----------



## Guymay (Jul 6, 2009)

Every split decision Guy Mezger ever lost .


----------



## demoman993 (Apr 8, 2007)

I'm gonna go with 
Cro Cop vs. Gonzaga - I know, it looked like Mirko was out but I think Herb Dean called that one a little early.

But seriously,

Hamill vs. Jones Fight should have been stopped long before that elbow, bad judgement on refs part.
Sherk vs. Dunham Clearly Dunham won that fight, I generously gave Sherk 1 round but really it wasn't that close where maybe Sherk or Maybe Dunham could have won.
Rutten vs. Randleman I can remember watching it and being pissed at the decision but can't remember why, will have to try and find it tonight and watch it.

Sorry, mind went blank at work, will finish the post later when I think it over.


----------



## Harness (Oct 3, 2009)

Ninja Vs. Rampage for sure! Rampage even tried giving him the trophy!!


----------



## GlasgowKiss (Sep 18, 2010)

sNuFf_rEaLiTy said:


> Maybe everyone who got "robbed" should have finished their respective fights...?


It's not like the supposed 'winners' finished any of the fights either.

Hammill/Bisping - just watched this last night. Shit decision.

Dunham/Sherk - as bad as anything I've seen.

Any Phil Baroni points loss is robbery !

There's been quite a few on TUF as well over the years, although my memory escapes me right now, with regards to what matches.


----------



## sNuFf_rEaLiTy (Feb 2, 2009)

I just think people are overly critical of judging in mma, especially when it comes to competitive matches and split decisions. Fighting and MMA scoring isn't always so cut and dry. And it always seems that it's a bad call when it doesn't go your favorite fighters way.

I thought machida lost the first shogun fight when I saw it live, and was as shocked as anyone by the decision. When I bought the DVD I scored it 3 rounds to 2 for lyoto. Now imagine sitting cage side with a single perspective on the fight, and having to judge it on what you saw after each round. People make it out to be highway robbery when in fact it could have gone either way. 

Same thing with Dunham/sherk, I scored it 2/1 in favor of sherk and my friend beside me scored it for Dunham. In the end the judges split the decision in favor of sherk and all of the sudden Dunham got robbed. The judges are just as human as the people on this forum, and are there to make opinionated judgements on what they see. End of story.

It's impossible to predict what a judge is looking at, the fighters know it and MMA fans should definitely know it. People need to separate their bias from fact IMO.


----------



## usernamewoman (Sep 24, 2007)

nog/bader compared with nog/brilz
guida/griffin
the 50-45 score on penn/edgar 1


----------



## ACTAFOOL (Dec 10, 2008)

sNuFf_rEaLiTy said:


> I just think people are overly critical of judging in mma, especially when it comes to competitive matches and split decisions. Fighting and MMA scoring isn't always so cut and dry. And it always seems that it's a bad call when it doesn't go your favorite fighters way.
> 
> I thought machida lost the first shogun fight when I saw it live, and was as shocked as anyone by the decision. When I bought the DVD I scored it 3 rounds to 2 for lyoto. Now imagine sitting cage side with a single perspective on the fight, and having to judge it on what you saw after each round. People make it out to be highway robbery when in fact it could have gone either way.
> 
> ...


i agree its not easy but man some fights its just impossible to understand the scoring, even if the right fighter won many times the fighter A won 2 rounds and got beat within a inch of his life in the 3rd but somehow some judges still score it 30-27

on the machida/shogun fight i agree though, watching it live i thought shogun won, rewatching it round by round and every single thing that happens every round it was tied 2 rounds for each until the final round wich could have gone to shogun but i really dont think he did enough to steal that round and win that belt


----------



## sNuFf_rEaLiTy (Feb 2, 2009)

ACTAFOOL said:


> i agree its not easy but man some fights its just impossible to understand the scoring, even if the right fighter won many times the fighter A won 2 rounds and got beat within a inch of his life in the 3rd but somehow some judges still score it 30-27
> 
> on the machida/shogun fight i agree though, watching it live i thought shogun won, rewatching it round by round and every single thing that happens every round it was tied 2 rounds for each until the final round wich could have gone to shogun but i really dont think he did enough to steal that round and win that belt


I've experienced my fair share of WTF moments in MMA judging. When they announced that 50/45 card at Penn/Edgar 1, I thought for sure Penn had retained. Again, shogun/machida was bizarre. And many more that elude meant the moment.

The question that is always levied at the judges after the fact though are "how did that dumbass who knows nothing about MMA get to judge that fight" and "that idiot made the wrong decision". When the real question is what exactly was that judge or judges looking at, and focusing their attention on that the other wasn't.

Okami/Marquardt or the Ozipchak and Soszynski fight are all good recent examples of this.


----------



## ACTAFOOL (Dec 10, 2008)

sNuFf_rEaLiTy said:


> I've experienced my fair share of WTF moments in MMA judging. When they announced that 50/45 card at Penn/Edgar 1, I thought for sure Penn had retained. Again, shogun/machida was bizarre. And many more that elude meant the moment.
> 
> The question that is always levied at the judges after the fact though are "how did that dumbass who knows nothing about MMA get to judge that fight" and "that idiot made the wrong decision". When the real question is what exactly was that judge or judges looking at, and focusing their attention on that the other wasn't.
> 
> Okami/Marquardt or the Ozipchak and Soszynski fight are all good recent examples of this.


yes, very true, maybe when fights are very close the judges take it upon themselves what should weigh more, though there are the rules of how to judge a fight already but i dont know...i think it comes down to the old ''TDs are worth too much'' its effective grappling and other crap all into 1 TD under the current system...

i remember reading that they were think of adding a .5 system...that would really help

in the end though its not easy to judge fights, even us fans view one fight very different, its not like one understands things more than the other, 2 hardcore fans know how to score a mma fight but still many times they score it differently...judging really isnt easy but some judges do seem simply blind:confused03:

we do need mma judges though...not boxing judges


----------



## sNuFf_rEaLiTy (Feb 2, 2009)

ACTAFOOL said:


> yes, very true, maybe when fights are very close the judges take it upon themselves what should weigh more, though there are the rules of how to judge a fight already but i dont know...i think it comes down to the old ''TDs are worth too much'' its effective grappling and other crap all into 1 TD under the current system...
> 
> i remember reading that they were think of adding a .5 system...that would really help
> 
> ...


There definitely seems to be a problem with judges who seem uninformed on the details of MMA, and I do think takedowns are scored favorably too high. I always hear how a single takedown can win a round, yet it doesn't seem to matter if the other guy sprawls 6 out of 7 times.

I also have to call into question the average or casual MMA fans knowledge of blocking defense, head movement and the likes. I find people count forearm blocked strikes as landed blows, or don't account for checked leg kicks.

And lord only knows how everything factors together. If a fighter is pushing the pace with aggression, but missing the mark and being peppered with counters. The striking and octagon control/aggression are in serious play. Or in the marquard/okami fight; sure that was nate's gameplan, but he effectively gave up octagon control and aggression. Due to the low number of strikes/takedowns and positional dominance, those 2 factors weighed heavily on the judges scorecard.

There is a criteria in which the elements of MMA should be judged, but it's the action in the ring that give the individual category precedence.


----------



## Indestructibl3 (Apr 2, 2009)

Shogun vs. Machida I
Lil Nog vs. Brilz
Varner vs. Shalorus (that was Varner's fight, hands down)


----------



## khoveraki (Jun 28, 2009)

If you have to mention Nog vs Brilz, you have to mention Nog vs Bader. Bader had ten seconds of GnP in rd1, then got stuffed and beat up for 13 minutes.


Sherk vs Dunham has to be #1 though. Even the UFC knows it was a bad call. Sherk has no fight lined up but Dunham is signed to face #5 LW in Florian.


----------



## Diokhan (Jul 8, 2008)

> Maybe everyone who got "robbed" should have finished their respective fights...?


like the person who was given a freebie unfair decision win did, right?

Most of these were mentioned already, but the fights I think about when talking about bs decisions are (in no specific order): 
Ricco vs. Nog
Li'l Nog vs. Brilz
Machida vs. Shogun
Bisping vs. Hammill
Rampage vs. Ninja
Tito vs. Vitor
Serra vs. Hughes


----------



## TanyaJade (Aug 31, 2010)

(In no particular order)

*-Jamie Varner vs. Kamal Shalorus-*

*-Javier Vazquez vs. LC Davis-*

*-Antonio Rodrigo Nogueira vs. Ricco Rodriguez-*

*-Chuck Liddell vs. Murilo Bustamante-*

*-Quinton Jackson vs. Murilo Rua-*

Honorable mentions--
Chan Sung Jung vs. Leonard Garcia
Diego Sanchez vs. John Alessio
Roy Nelson vs. Jeff Monson
Royce Gracie vs. Kazushi Sakuraba II
Tyson Griffin vs. Clay Guida

To some other mentions--

Hamill vs. Bisping
Should have been scored a draw. Round 1 was an easy 10-8 for Hamill, but it wasn't ludicrous to think that Bisping won the last two rounds. I personally thought that Hamill won the fight, but I can see how it may have been given to Bisping

Machida vs. Shogun I
Regardless of who you thought won, it was very obvious that the fight as a whole was very close. The first three rounds in particular were relatively hard to score. While I consider it a bad decision, I don't put it in the same league as Ricco vs. Big Nog.

Henderson vs. Franklin
In the UFC, takedowns and top control tend to outweigh actual damage. Henderson controlled the first round, and about two minutes of the second round, and then got outstruck silly in the latter portions of the second round, and all of the third round.

Arona vs. Emelianenko
The rules in RINGS were alot different than the modern UFC rules. Points were not given for control, and damage only. While Arona controlled most of the fight with his Jiu-Jitsu, Fedor did do more damage. In the UFC, the decision would have easily been given to Arona.

Nogueira vs. Brilz
This fight was the victim of round scoring. Round 1 was very close. Round 2 was unquestionably Brilz's round, and round 3 was Nogueira's. It all depends on how you think the first round should have been scored.


----------



## sNuFf_rEaLiTy (Feb 2, 2009)

Diokhan said:


> like the person who was given a freebie unfair decision win did, right?
> 
> Most of these were mentioned already, but the fights I think about when talking about bs decisions are (in no specific order):
> Ricco vs. Nog
> ...


Serra vs Hughes??? That's a bit of a stretch calling that a robbery don't you think? 

I will say that I thought Korean zombie was robbed pretty badly against Garcia, though the 2nd and 3rd rounds were def hard to score.


----------



## Scout200 (Apr 27, 2010)

I'd have to say Hamill v Bisping. Now that was a true robbery!


----------



## Couchwarrior (Jul 13, 2007)

Hammerlock2.0 said:


> Honorable mention: Henderson/Franklin





Terror Kovenant said:


> Henderson vs Franklin was the most blatant





PheelGoodInc said:


> Hendo Franklin - absolute worst. Franklin easily won it.


Nice to see that decision finally getting some recognition, there weren't many protests right after the fight, perhaps because Hendo was the much more popular fighter back then.
I wouldn't go as far as saying it was one of the worst decisions ever, but let's just say it takes a bit of creativity to score it for Hendo.


----------



## Saenchai (Mar 11, 2010)

i don't know much of them but those that i know and that should clearly be judged the other way (at least that's how i see it) are:

rampage - ninja
rampage - griffin
machida - shogun


----------



## Toxic (Mar 1, 2007)

Ari said:


> (In no particular order)
> 
> *-Jamie Varner vs. Kamal Shalorus-*
> 
> ...


I agree with pretty much your entire list except for Nelson/Monson. That fight was a stalemate the entire fight so to me the 200 knees no matter how insignificant landed in the clinch by Monson have to count for something. Put it this way one fighter did nothing the entire fight, the other guy did nothing but threw a bunch of knees. You gotta give it to the guy who threw the knees.


----------



## John8204 (May 13, 2010)

khoveraki said:


> If you have to mention Nog vs Brilz, you have to mention Nog vs Bader. Bader had ten seconds of GnP in rd1, then got stuffed and beat up for 13 minutes.
> 
> 
> Sherk vs Dunham has to be #1 though. Even the UFC knows it was a bad call. Sherk has no fight lined up but Dunham is signed to face #5 LW in Florian.


I re-watched the fight

Well round one Bader had Nog down for about 2 minutes, and had 2 take downs, Nog got in some great shots but it wasn't enough to win the round.

Round two Nog threw a lot of shots, but it looked like most of them missed, Bader had one takedown and one shove down which followed with a serious attack and landed a strong right.

Round three Bader had two take downs, Nog might have won the exchanges (mostly with jabs) but Bader was nailing Nog with strong rights and he finished the round on top and in control.

So Bader had 6 take downs in addition Nog didn't do any damage. Nog might have won round 2, but Bader won rounds one and three.

When I was watching it, I thought it was a lot closer but on second viewing I agree with the judges. I certainly don't think the fight merits consideration for worst decision ever.


----------



## Bonnar426 (Jul 18, 2006)

Almost every decision involving Dan Henderson!


----------



## TanyaJade (Aug 31, 2010)

Bonnar426 said:


> Almost every decision involving Dan Henderson!


Quoted for truth.

vs. Carlos Newton
vs. Hiromitsu Kanehara
vs. Murilo Bustamante
vs. Antonio Rodrigo Nogueira
vs. Renato Sobral
vs. Murilo Rua
vs. Yuki Kondo
vs. Rich Franklin

Fights in which Henderson came out on top that have been highly disputed decisions.


----------



## Bonnar426 (Jul 18, 2006)

Ari said:


> Quoted for truth.
> 
> vs. Carlos Newton
> vs. Hiromitsu Kanehara
> ...


You forgot the BIG one! vs. Murilo Bustamante 2! The fight where Dan won the PRIDE FC WW Title because of incompetent judging!


----------



## TanyaJade (Aug 31, 2010)

Bonnar426 said:


> You forgot the BIG one! vs. Murilo Bustamante 2! The fight where Dan won the PRIDE FC WW Title because of incompetent judging!


I certainly did.
Wow, I just watched that fight and I've been laughing my ass off since.


----------



## Machida Karate (Nov 30, 2009)

edlavis88 said:


> 1. Randleman/Rutten
> 2. Brilz/Lil Nog
> 3. Machida/Shogun I
> 4. Hamill/Bisping
> ...


Lol i like this one, that Randleman/Rutten fight was Bs, and i love Bas!


----------



## Roflcopter (Sep 5, 2008)

Glothin said:


> I am going to win this thread, hands down:
> 
> Lee Murray/Securitas Cash Management Lmt, February 21, 2006,
> 53 million British Pounds


:laugh:

Win. So hard.



John8204 said:


> I re-watched the fight
> 
> Well round one Bader had Nog down for about 2 minutes, and had 2 take downs, Nog got in some great shots but it wasn't enough to win the round.
> 
> ...


Yeah, that didn't make much sense to me. Bader easily took the fight, I had him up 30-27.

Nog barely even edged him in the stand up, let alone the fight.


----------

