Gladly.
First round, I valued the impact of the strikes. The totals seemed quite close, within five or so I'd wager, but the physical impact (swelling, laceration, etc) on Borrelho's face around his temple and right eye (not counting the eye poke) was visible to me. He seemed to take the shots worse than Magomedov. Most of Borralho's strikes in the round were leg kicks, while Magomedov was largely headhunting. Borralho failed on his takedown so there was nothing of note in the grappling category in R1 for me to score. One of the three judges agreed that Magomedov won R1. I had it 10-9 Magomedov.
Second round, they were extremely close in terms of striking. Again, the determining factor for me scoring R2 for Magomedov was that his strikes to the head and body seemed more damaging individually, but it was the kind of coin-flip round where you could give it to Borralho as well. All three judges gave that one to Borralho. I had it 10-9 Magomedov.
Third round, it was a clear round for Borralho, some even considered it a 10-8. I had it 10-9 Borralho, for a total of 29-28 Magomedov, but it was exceptionally close and I have no issue with a 29-28 for Caio or even a 30-27 for that matter.
As a reminder, we don't see strike stats when scoring live, and if we do get them on the broadcast, we do not give them much credence because they are unofficial. If some people viewed R1 as extremely close, and some people viewed R2 also as extremely close, then what's the issue with seeing both rounds for one fighter?
