UFC 313: Post-Fight Admission - Did The Wrong Fighter Win?

Luna Greco

5 min read

Post on May 19, 2025

4.0

Share

A Round-by-Round Breakdown of the Controversial Fight

Analyzing the fight round by round is crucial to understanding the controversy surrounding the UFC 313 main event. The fight statistics, focusing on significant strikes landed, takedown attempts, and ground control, paint a picture far from clear-cut. Each round presented its own complexities, contributing to the fiercely debated outcome.

• Round 1: Adesanya controlled the distance with his superior footwork, landing consistent jabs and keeping Pereira at bay. Pereira, while landing fewer significant strikes, exhibited the power to change the momentum of the fight with any clean connection. This round was arguably close, but many scored it for Adesanya.

• Round 2: Pereira began to find his range, landing powerful counters and showing his dangerous knockout power. Adesanya maintained his movement but appeared to absorb more significant damage in this round. This round was closer still, and opinions were split.

• Round 3: Both fighters traded blows, with Adesanya showcasing some impressive combinations while Pereira pressed the action and landed some significant strikes of his own. The round was incredibly competitive, making it difficult to score definitively for either fighter.

• Round 4 & 5: The final two rounds further fueled the controversy. Adesanya maintained his calculated strikes, but Pereira's power punches consistently threatened to end the fight. Control time was often contested, contributing to varied scoring opinions. The cumulative effect of these rounds is where the disparity in scoring became most apparent.

Examining the Judges' Scorecards and Scoring Criteria

Understanding the UFC 313 scoring requires examining the unified rules of MMA and the 10-point must system. This system awards 10 points to the fighter deemed to have won the round, and 9 or fewer points to the opponent. However, judging in MMA is subjective and relies on interpretation. A comparison of the three judges' scorecards in this fight reveals some significant discrepancies.

• Explanation of the 10-point must system: While seemingly straightforward, the application of the 10-point must system often leads to differing opinions, especially in close rounds. This is especially true when fighters utilize diverse striking and grappling techniques.

• Comparison of the three judges' scorecards: The varying scores highlight the subjectivity in MMA judging. Some judges favored Adesanya's consistent point fighting, while others gave greater weight to Pereira's power punches and moments of control.

• Analysis of any significant deviations from expected scoring: The significant deviations underscore the challenges of evaluating the finer points of MMA judging where the criteria are not always clearly defined. This lack of clarity is a common source of contention in highly competitive bouts.

• Discussion of potential bias or misinterpretations of judging criteria: The possibility of unconscious bias, based on fighters' reputations or perceived aggression, cannot be completely dismissed in subjective scoring systems.

The Impact of Specific Moments on the Fight Outcome

Certain key moments significantly impacted the fight's outcome, contributing to the fiercely debated scorecards.

• Detailed analysis of any near-knockdowns or submissions: Several instances of near-knockdowns from both fighters illustrate the volatility of the fight and the difficulty in scoring decisively in such rounds.

• Discussion of the effectiveness of each fighter's striking and grappling: While both fighters employed effective techniques, the differing styles – Adesanya's calculated precision and Pereira's explosive power – made it more challenging for judges to definitively determine which fighter controlled the fight.

• Assessment of the significance of cage control and effective striking in the later rounds: In the later rounds, Pereira's more aggressive style led him to consistently pressure Adesanya, thus increasing his control time and potentially swaying the judges' opinions.

Post-Fight Reactions and Public Opinion

The aftermath of UFC 313 was marked by widespread disagreement and intense online debate.

• Summary of social media sentiment: Social media exploded with reactions, largely expressing disbelief and disappointment in the announced result. Many felt the judging did not accurately reflect the fight's events.

• Quotes from fighters and analysts regarding the fight outcome: Both fighters and prominent MMA analysts offered diverse perspectives, with many analysts expressing concerns about the judging and its consistency.

• Analysis of mainstream media coverage of the controversy: Major sports outlets highlighted the controversy, adding to the debate and fueling discussions about potential improvements to MMA judging standards.

Conclusion

The UFC 313 main event remains a hotly debated topic, underscoring the inherent complexities and subjective nature of MMA judging. While a detailed, round-by-round analysis offers valuable insight, the ultimate determination of who “won” the fight remains a matter of individual interpretation. The discrepancies in the judges' scorecards, the subjective nature of MMA scoring criteria, and the overwhelming negative fan reaction all contribute to a lingering sense of unease surrounding the result. This event raises important questions about the clarity and consistency of MMA judging practices and how best to resolve future controversial decisions. What are your thoughts on the UFC 313 decision? Did the wrong fighter win? Share your analysis in the comments below!