Proof that the UFC determines who wins decisions?
Okay after watch UFC 104 tonight.. I was excited to watch Lyoto defend his title. Knowing that the LHW title has a curse on it (everyone after Chuck has lost the title on their first defense.. Rampage lost to Forest, Forest lost to Rashad, Rashad lost to Lyoto.. and tonight it looked liked Lyoto lost to Shogun).
When Lyoto won, first I was shocked and happy. I mean Lyoto is a great guy, makes an effort to learn and speak English and he finally broke the LHW title curse. BUT! When all 3 judges agreed that Lyoto won when in many eyes he obviously didn't it got me thinking.. Is the UFC deciding who wins decisions? Here's some evidence that I've thought of..
Michael Bisping beat Matt Hamill at UFC 75 in London. It's no secret Michael Bisping is the poster boy for the UK. He represents the UK well. He's very passionate about his country and he's even fighting on the UFC 105 card in Manchester. So it's obvious to associate the UK with Michael Bisping because when the UFC goes to the UK, Michael Bisping goes too. NOW Matt Hamill obviously won that fight but the judges scored it for Bisping. Most will agree they did it because he's so popular in the UK, losing in his own country would hurt his image losing to an American in the UK.
So we're over that. From here we can see that the UFC favors the more marketable and favorite fighters in decisions. That seems smart in a busniess move because you can always go back and blame the judges and go "that's why we urge guys to finish fights because you never know where a decision can lead to" if you're Dana White and no one ever has to know. The marketable fighter becomes more marketable.
I'm sure there's alot more controversial decisions that are great examples of the UFC judges favoring in the more marketable and fan favorite fighter but the Matt Hamil and Michael Bisping one is the one that stands out to me. If you know more post them please.
NOW in my opinion I do think in a way the UFC have a say so over who wins decisions. I think if the champion gets knocked out or submitted then they just roll with it (example: Lyoto vs Rashad). I personally think the UFC never planned for Lyoto to knock out Rashad but instead for Lyoto to take Rashad to a decision and have Rashad retain the belt.. but instead the UFC got a huge upset and Rashad got knocked out cold. So the UFC has no choice and Lyoto becomes the champion and the crowd instantly gets behind him. Lyoto is now a fan favorite and he has this charisma and brings that excitement that a champion should have. Lyoto is officially marketable.
NOW tonight Lyoto fights Shogun.. the crowd is behind Lyoto the whole fight except one time I THINK I heard a Shogun chant. Lyoto obviously has a hard time fighting Shogun, Shogun is the one landing and all you heard from Joe Rogan's mouth was "Great shot to the body by Shogun!", "Great kick to Shogun", "Yeah Lyoto might of landed more punches in that exchange but Shogun looked to land the hardest with that right punch". All this adds up to basically Shogun winning. He's the one doing all the damage here. So when decision time comes and we hear that Lyoto has retained... and all 3 judges are in his favor.. this just shows the favorism I think the UFC shows to their marketable fighters.
I don't think Shogun ISN'T marketable I mean after a performance against Lyoto tonight he has gained fans, I'm one of them. But lets be honest. He didn't beat Lyoto in a devastating way, he doesn't understand English and outside of Pride what has he really done? Especially in the UFC. He's no Anderson Silva in the way that Anderson can get away without knowing much English because what he lacks in commutation he makes up for by his performances.. the dude is amazing.
So I don't think it's too much of a theory to think that the UFC has power in who wins these decisions. You could say that the judges favor one fighter over the other but in a performance tonight for example how can these judges give so many controversial decisions to fighters and not get fired or their decisions or jobs revoked? I understand the UFC doesn't really have a say-so over who judges but is that a bad thing? Would it be too much to think what if the UFC pays them extra to lean a certain fighters way?
I remember Lyoto saying (I don't remember where) but he was asked about learning and speaking English and he said he wasn't able to coach TUF because his English was bad. Does this mean that the UFC wanted Lyoto to coach TUF with Rampage? In hopes that Rampage would knock Lyoto out and ruin what winning streak he had at the time in hopes that they wouldn't have to give him a title shot? Because at the time Lyoto wasn't known for finishing guys and being exciting. He was far from marketable IMO. So when Lyoto couldn't coach TUF they really had no choice but to give him a title shot since he's the most deserving of one thus far. And it backfired on the UFC but at the same time it made Lyoto a star and now he's under that protection wing of the UFC.. Until a more marketable fighter takes him to a decision.
I don't think the fighters are aware if the UFC gives them decision wins or not but it's hard for me to believe that you can just blame the judges in these situations. I think the UFC is too corrupt to just give anyone the title from a decision without that person having proper "championship like traits" like charisma and being exciting".
Is this idea too far out there? Is the UFC really that nice and holy? I mean there isn't a ranking system in the UFC they give title shots to who they want. They try to make exciting fights. Do they also try to pick the winner in decisions that would benefit them the most?
Last edited by ZaoSyn; 10-25-2009 at 02:58 AM.