UFC 312 Scorecards: Du Plessis Vs Strickland 2

kobexielite 𝕯𝖎𝖌𝖎𝖙𝖆𝖑 𝕸𝖊𝖉𝖎𝖆

You need 3 min read

·

Post on Feb 09, 2025

46 visitor like this post

Share

UFC 312 Scorecards: Du Plessis vs Strickland 2 - A Controversial Split Decision

The highly anticipated rematch between Dricus du Plessis and Robert Whittaker at UFC 312 delivered a thrilling main event, but it also sparked considerable debate amongst fans and experts alike. The fight ended in a split decision victory for Du Plessis, leading to a flurry of discussions about the scorecards and whether the judges got it right. Let's delve into the details and dissect the controversial scoring.

Round-by-Round Breakdown: A Close Contest

The fight was a back-and-forth affair, with both fighters showcasing their strengths throughout the five rounds. While Du Plessis utilized his wrestling and powerful striking, Whittaker relied on his superior striking accuracy and elusive footwork. There wasn't a single round that was definitively one fighter's – making the scoring incredibly subjective.

Round 1: A Feeling-Out Process

The first round was largely a feeling-out process. Both fighters were cautious, testing each other's range and defense. While Whittaker landed some cleaner strikes, Du Plessis secured a takedown late in the round, potentially giving him the edge in the eyes of some judges.

Round 2: Du Plessis' Pressure Pays Off

Du Plessis began to increase the pressure in the second round, landing heavier strikes and securing another takedown. Whittaker's striking was still effective, but Du Plessis’ aggression and control on the ground might have swayed some judges.

Round 3 & 4: A Back-and-Forth Battle

Rounds 3 and 4 were incredibly close, with both fighters trading blows and showcasing their skills. Whittaker's speed and precision were impressive, while Du Plessis' power and takedown attempts were undeniable. These rounds could arguably have been scored for either fighter, fueling the post-fight controversy.

Round 5: Whittaker's Late Push

The fifth and final round saw Whittaker unleash a flurry of strikes, seemingly putting pressure on Du Plessis in the final minute. This late surge could have influenced the perception of the fight, with many feeling Whittaker did enough to secure the round and potentially the fight.

The Controversial Scorecards: Why the Debate?

The judges' scorecards read 48-47, 48-47, and 47-48, resulting in a split decision victory for Du Plessis. The 47-48 scorecard, awarding Whittaker the final round, highlights the close nature of the fight. Many felt Whittaker's consistent accuracy and late surge in the fifth round should have been enough to earn him the victory. The debate centers on the subjectivity of MMA judging and the difficulty of quantifying the effectiveness of various fighting techniques.

Arguments for Du Plessis: His takedowns, ground control, and significant power punches arguably gave him the edge in several rounds. The cumulative effect of his aggression, even if less refined than Whittaker's, might have influenced some judges.

Arguments for Whittaker: His superior striking accuracy, elusive movement, and late surge in the fifth round painted a compelling case for a Whittaker victory. Many felt his cleaner striking should have outweighed Du Plessis' takedowns.

The Impact on the Middleweight Division: Future Implications

The controversial decision adds another layer of intrigue to the already compelling UFC middleweight division. The outcome leaves many fans and analysts questioning the clarity and consistency of judging in the sport. Regardless of the outcome, both Du Plessis and Whittaker solidified their positions as elite contenders. This fight only fuels anticipation for their future matches and the potential for a trilogy fight. The controversy will likely continue to be debated, and possibly even influence scoring criteria in future UFC events.

Conclusion: Subjectivity Remains a Challenge

The UFC 312 scorecards for Du Plessis vs. Strickland 2 highlight the inherent subjectivity in MMA judging. While scoring criteria exist, the interpretation of those criteria remains open to debate. This fight reinforces the need for continued efforts to improve transparency and consistency in MMA judging, fostering a more equitable and widely accepted system. Only time will tell if this contentious fight will be remembered as a classic, or a controversial blemish on an otherwise exciting card.