Worst scores fighters have recieved and judges who gave a fighter pity points after an awful fight

don't ask

Special Secretary of Shitposting
@red
Joined
Feb 4, 2022
Messages
8,587
Reaction score
14,777
One judge scored Quarry vs Starnes as 30-24, but the other two judges gave Starnes some charity points or something. I think all three should have scored that 30-24.

Has there ever been a worse showing on the judges cards? Has any fighter ever had 3 (or five) 30-24 scores? I know I've seen fights in which I thought the judges were being way too nice to one of the fighters, but none come to mind right now.

Has any fighter ever had a worse showing than Starnes?

EDIT: doing some digging, Nam Phan got 30-24, 30-25, 30-26 when he fought Siver, which is worse than Starnes' 30-26, 30-27, 30-24.

I don't remember the Nam fight at all.
 
Last edited:
Wasn't GSP vs Fitch 50-39? It sure felt like it

lol it sure did feel like it.

I just looked it up on Wiki, lowest score was 50-43. I would have died of laughter if Fitch got a 10-7 round. I think there's only been one or two of those. Forrest something got one, not sure if anyone else did.
 
so two theories floating around on that starnes fight. one was that he broke his foot right off the bat and knew he was useless from that point forward (although it didn't affect his running). second was that he did it on purpose as some sort of screw-you thing over his contract. given the fact that he never did it before or since, there had to have been something up. would be nice to get the definitive answer on it.
 
Last edited:
lol it sure did feel like it.

I just looked it up on Wiki, lowest score was 50-43. I would have died of laughter if Fitch got a 10-7 round. I think there's only been one or two of those. Forrest something got one, not sure if anyone else did.
Ricky Glenn had a 10-7 round vs. Gavin Tucker on one of the scorecards.
 
Ricky Glenn had a 10-7 round vs. Gavin Tucker on one of the scorecards.

I kind of want to watch all the 10-7 rounds. It's crazy that a fight can be that lopsided and still go to the judges.
 
so two theories floating around on that starnes fight. one was that he broke his foot right off the bat and knew he was useless from that point forward (although it didn't affect his running). second was that he did it on purpose as some sort of screw-you thing over his contract. given that fact that he never did it before or since, there had to have been something up. would be nice to get the definitive answer on it.

I just found an article discussing it and it didn't say anything interesting about the fight, BUT it did say in the lead-in to the fight that Starnes was being a diva. According to Quarry, he challenged Starnes to a fight to avenge Leben's loss to Starnes, but Starnes refused, saying that Quarry wasn't on Starne's level because Quarry had just been sent to the mortuary by Rich Franklin.

If true, this makes Starne's bizarre performance even funnier.

Of your two options, I think it's more likely to be a fuck-you than an injury, just because he wasn't moving like he had an injury and he was doing a LOT of moving.
 
Khabib vs Barboza was 30-25, 30-25, 30-24
 
One judge scored Quarry vs Starnes as 30-24, but the other two judges gave Starnes some charity points or something. I think all three should have scored that 30-24.

Has there ever been a worse showing on the judges cards? Has any fighter ever had 3 (or five) 30-24 scores? I know I've seen fights in which I thought the judges were being way too nice to one of the fighters, but none come to mind right now.

Has any fighter ever had a worse showing than Starnes?

EDIT: doing some digging, Nam Phan got 30-24, 30-25, 30-26 when he fought Siver, which is worse than Starnes' 30-26, 30-27, 30-24.

I don't remember the Nam fight at all.
This one is a little different but go watch "Filthy" Tom Lawlor vs Aaron Simpson. Tom did all but kill Simpson in the first and then Aaron eeked out the 2nd and 3rd and got the win. The judges not giving a 10-8 even back then was one of the biggest crimes that went ignored since it wasn't a title fight or high stakes.
 
Clay Guida vs Gray Maynard.

While I didn't appreciate Clay's style in the fight, Maynard looked frustrated and ineffective due to Clay's newfound wonky movement and evasiveness.

Clay should've been given the W
 
I just found an article discussing it and it didn't say anything interesting about the fight, BUT it did say in the lead-in to the fight that Starnes was being a diva. According to Quarry, he challenged Starnes to a fight to avenge Leben's loss to Starnes, but Starnes refused, saying that Quarry wasn't on Starne's level because Quarry had just been sent to the mortuary by Rich Franklin.

If true, this makes Starne's bizarre performance even funnier.

Of your two options, I think it's more likely to be a fuck-you than an injury, just because he wasn't moving like he had an injury and he was doing a LOT of moving.

I saw that fight live in Montreal at UFC 83. The Canadian crowd was booing Starnes and cheering Quarry. It was nuts.
 
aw that fight live in Montreal at UFC 83. The Canadian crowd was booing Starnes and cheering Quarry. It was nuts.

"I can change, you can change, everyone can change!" -- Nate Balboa
 
I just randomly googled Nate Quarry after reading about the anti-trust UFC case and boom here he is again!
 
Clay Guida vs Gray Maynard.

While I didn't appreciate Clay's style in the fight, Maynard looked frustrated and ineffective due to Clay's newfound wonky movement and evasiveness.

Clay should've been given the W
No I remember that fight. Clay was actively avoiding engagements and trying not to fight. The ref had to pause the fight and tell Clay to fight or we would start deducting points. It was a shitty situation for Clay. He was in there with a guy that was a better wrestler than him, a better striker than him and could knock him clean out. Maynard earned the W just by moving forward and trying to fight.
 
Diego Sanchez won multiple fights by walking forward and getting punched in the face. There had to be some pity points in there and as far as accuracy of scoring it was awful :).

Sanchez vs Pearson and Sanchez vs Kampmann looked like fights that were judged by Wimp Lo from Kung Pow: Enter the Fist!

The one that is bleeding is the winner!

But for what your really asking about Rich Franklin vs David Loiseau.
Scorecards were
50-42, 50-42, 50-43.

Loiseau was never the same after either.
 
No I remember that fight. Clay was actively avoiding engagements and trying not to fight. The ref had to pause the fight and tell Clay to fight or we would start deducting points. It was a shitty situation for Clay. He was in there with a guy that was a better wrestler than him, a better striker than him and could knock him clean out. Maynard earned the W just by moving forward and trying to fight.

Haha. Your post pretty much explains why Clay should've won the fight.

"Stand in front of me so I can punch you now".

I agree it was ugly, but fighters shouldn't be rewarded for ineffective aggression.
 
Two judges each gave Shields two rounds against GSP.

I remember that. Because of how well Shields was striking with him:

https%3A%2F%2Fbucketeer-e05bbc84-baa3-437e-9518-adb32be77984.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2F5f7e47db-0a42-4d04-b5d4-a4f244eb9459_498x213.gif
 
Diego Sanchez won multiple fights by walking forward and getting punched in the face. There had to be some pity points in there and as far as accuracy of scoring it was awful :).

Sanchez vs Pearson and Sanchez vs Kampmann looked like fights that were judged by Wimp Lo from Kung Pow: Enter the Fist!

The one that is bleeding is the winner!

But for what your really asking about Rich Franklin vs David Loiseau.
Scorecards were
50-42, 50-42, 50-43.

Loiseau was never the same after either.
Absolute beating. It'll be hard to surpass this one.
 
Back
Top