With complete unanimity, all three judges at UFC 139 scored the first three rounds for Dan Henderson 10-9, and the next two rounds for Mauricio ‘Shogun’ Rua 9-10. leading to a unanious 47-48 decision for Henderson.
The point of contention is whether the fifth and final round should have been scored a 10-8, with everyone from Dana White to, well, to abouyt everyone stating that if the final round was not a 10-8, what is?
Dallas Winston recently interviwed Executive Director of the Nevada State Athletic Commission Keith Kizer about rumors that the NSAC discouraged 10-8 rounds, or 10-10 rounds.
Dallas Winston: So to put this rumor to rest, judges are in no way discouraged from offering scores other than 10-9?
Keith Kizer: “Correct.”
DW: And you’re OK with the use of 10-8 and 10-10 rounds?
KK: “Yes.”
DW: In any state, almost every round has historically been scored 10-9, however, many feel that using more 10-10 and 10-8 scores would better reflect the different levels of dominance we see in the cage. Do you agree or disagree, and can you explain why?
KK: “A round score should not influenced but what has happened ‘historically.’ Once again I disagree with any insinuation that we should tell judges they have to give more 10-10 or 10-8 rounds. Rather each round should be scored on its own merits, and nothing else.”
The relevant text from the NSAC website reads:
C. Point Totals
1. two fighters who draw are given a score of 10-10
2. the fighter who wins a round is given a score of 10-9
3.The fighter who dominates a round is given a score of 10-8
(a score of 10-7 is possible for a dominant round)
The challenge of course is to define what separates a dominant round from a winning round. The sport needs a universally understood standard by which rounds are judged.
