Was Matt Serra Robbed?

by FutureChamp on Aug 17, 2009 8:45 AM EDT

Alright, I know. This is a verrryyyy old topic, but honestly it needs to be talked about because it shows that someone who work's so hard for a fight of epic status and delivers can get robbed by a bad decision so easily. My motto on fighting has always been "If you didn't like the result, you should have finished the fight." But seeing how Matt Serra didn't finish Matt Hughes at UFC 98, I do feel sympathy for him because after watching the fight again, I do think he deserved the split decision win. In round 1, he clearly won with dropping Hughes and landing some huge shots while Hughes did virtually nothing. In round 2, Matt Hughes clearly won with the takedown and control. That was an easy round to call. But round 3 is what gets me every single time. Serra and Hughes both got a hit or two in until Hughes got the takedown. But while on his back, Serra did way more with the submission attempts next to Hughes just laying on top giving kidney punches. Then when they stand back up, Serra gets the most unexpected takedown ever and lands more huge shots on Hughes. One or two at the most. But still, with all that being said and done, does Serra not deserve the win for all he did in contrast to what Hughes did? This to me was flawed judging, but it all goes back to my motto so I can't exactly say Serra had the thing locked. Either way, I would love to see a rematch if they ever put it on and I know the results would be diffrent for sure. Or not.

The FanPosts are solely the subjective opinions of Bloody Elbow readers and do not necessarily reflect the views of Bloody Elbow editors or staff.

Tweet Comment 22 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

There’s no such thing as someone who should have won by split decision.

Walla walla walla I'm an idiot.

by ufc4 on Aug 17, 2009 9:11 AM EDT via mobile reply actions 8 recs

I rec’d this since I hate it when people say he “should have won a split decision”.

by McEwen on Aug 17, 2009 9:53 AM EDT up reply actions

I dont get it.

Why cant you think someone should have won by split decision when people do win by split decisions?

"I will knock your hair black!"- Ken Shamrock to Tito Ortiz

by FutureChamp on Aug 17, 2009 11:10 AM EDT up reply actions

a split decision means the judges disagree

ideally a split decision shouldn’t even need to exist

by yngjzy on Aug 17, 2009 11:24 AM EDT up reply actions

Oh.

That confused me for a minute, but ok. Sweet. Haha.

"I will knock your hair black!"- Ken Shamrock to Tito Ortiz

by FutureChamp on Aug 17, 2009 11:27 AM EDT up reply actions

A Split Decision is a winning criterion in several full-contact combat sports, such as boxing, kickboxing, Muay Thai, mixed martial arts and others sports involving striking in which two of the three judges score for the same fighter as the winner, while the third judge scores for the other fighter.

so how can someone not win by split decision if 2 judges score it for one fighter and 1 scores it for another? the fighter with the 2 judges winning scores wins.

by erogers72 on Aug 17, 2009 2:54 PM EDT up reply actions

The point is if one person looks at a fight and thinks fighter A won then he shouldn’t say one out of every three people should disagree. If you think that fighter won then the decision should be unanimous. What the author was saying, and what a lot of people think, is that if a fighter wins two rounds and loses one that’s a split decision but it isn’t.

Walla walla walla I'm an idiot.

by ufc4 on Aug 17, 2009 4:30 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions 1 recs

I do think he deserved the split decision win

sigh…one person cannot declare a split decision win or loss. Either someone won, or they lost. It’s when someone disagrees with you that you get a split decision.

by Scott Haber on Aug 17, 2009 9:46 AM EDT reply actions

Here is Fightmetric’s analysis of Hughes vs Serra. The third was close enough that their system scores it a draw, though it also believes Hughes did more over the course of the fight.

You can argue the fight should go one way or another, but its hard to argue he was “robbed.”

by Graven Image on Aug 17, 2009 9:51 AM EDT reply actions 1 recs

My bad,

I meant the decision win all-in-all. I just thought he won the fight.

"I will knock your hair black!"- Ken Shamrock to Tito Ortiz

by FutureChamp on Aug 17, 2009 9:53 AM EDT reply actions

I thought Hughes edged it out but the fight was close enough to argue either way. There should be a rematch.

Visit MMAEruption.com!

by MMAEruption on Aug 17, 2009 9:53 AM EDT reply actions

I'm a big Serra Fan...

I think he has a real fighter’s spirit… I also think his skills are somewhat under-appreciated due to the fact that he’s so undersized at 170… I wish he would drop back to 155 bc I think he’d give a lot of those guys fits… But I’ll be tuned into all his fights from here on, regardless of weight, bc I really am a fan.

I also think he won the fight… even tho they clashed heads in rd. 1. I’m obviously not a fan of LnP, which is basically what Matt Hughes did… but that third rd. takedown from Serra was so epic, hahah… I was watchin live hopin it would secure a victory for the Terra, and was dissapointed when Hughes got the nod.

I'm like PacMan fightin you silly kids... throw ya Hatton the ring, and get knocked outlike Ricky did.
lol.

by Loot on Aug 17, 2009 10:20 AM EDT reply actions

Totally agreed.

I thought that takedown in the third cemented the win for Serra, but who knows. Besides, when are they gonna start giving points for submission attempts?

"I will knock your hair black!"- Ken Shamrock to Tito Ortiz

by FutureChamp on Aug 17, 2009 10:45 AM EDT reply actions

close fight

i had hughes winning. Hughes actually landed a couple decent punches while standing throughout the fight. The only damage serra did imo, was after the head butt. Which is another thing that has its place in this conversation. The first round would have played out completely different had the ref noticed and givin him recovery time. The last round though i agree could have gone either way. Definately could have been a draw. Also I dont think we should give much credit to submission attempts unless they are close to submitting. Serra used a good rubberguard but He never had Hughes in danger of tapping. I still think Hughes deserved the win. Had Serra won there would be a lot more controversy imo because of the head butt in the 1st that the ref should have noticed

by moopwontplay on Aug 17, 2009 10:57 AM EDT reply actions

I agree that it was an entertaining fight and I’d like to see a rematch although I haven’t heard any talk of one.

Walla walla walla I'm an idiot.

by ufc4 on Aug 17, 2009 1:09 PM EDT via mobile reply actions

to close to be called robbed. should have been a draw really. :-)

by bdw on Aug 17, 2009 4:06 PM EDT reply actions

Yeah he was but sadly this year many fighters have been robbed of wins, it’s really become quite a bad year in judging fights. There needs to be some new training for these guys because it’s obvious that most judges have no idea how to score fights.

by Raker on Aug 17, 2009 4:07 PM EDT reply actions

nobody is ever robbed in a close fight

i think matt serra won, but it was so close, i easily see how hughes won. matt hamill was robbed in the bisping fight, that wasnt close

I'm old school hating Lesnar, I've been hating Lesnar since '08

by MicahW on Aug 17, 2009 4:09 PM EDT reply actions

true

rich franklin “lost” to hendo but ended up as the main vs wandy and got out of coaching tuf, which he already had expressed that he did not want. seems he benefitted almost. fans are able to tell when a fight is really close and the losing fighter doesn’t lose any respect, like carlos condit vs matin kampann.

by bdw on Aug 17, 2009 4:24 PM EDT up reply actions

he dropped Hughes with a head butt.. other than that he wasn’t able to much once Hughes cleared his head from that. Hughes won the rest of the fight by boring control. Hughes by decision.

by stearnum on Aug 17, 2009 5:19 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs