Laura Sanko, UFC analyst and color commentator, has expressed agreement with the judges who scored the main event of UFC 297 for Dricus du Plessis over Sean Strickland. The closely contested five-round battle in Toronto ended with du Plessis capturing the UFC middleweight title, ending Strickland’s 132-day reign as champion.
Sanko explained her scoring of the fight, stating, “I did have Dricus, both when I watched it live and when I went back and re-watched it. I had Dricus winning by the narrowest of margins, the smallest of margins.” While Strickland out-landed du Plessis in both total and significant strikes, Sanko emphasized that immediate damage plays a crucial role in the scoring criteria.
She delved into the intricacies of judging a fight, mentioning an inherent bias towards bigger punches in scoring. Sanko likened her approach to imagining a volume knob or power meter, where a fighter landing a significant shot causes the knob to shift, and subsequent strikes by the opponent may not bring it back to zero. This perspective sheds light on the complexity of scoring and the importance of considering the impact of each strike.
Despite Strickland’s statistical advantage in strikes, Sanko highlighted that the numbers don’t always tell the full story. She acknowledged the confusion surrounding scoring criteria and emphasized the need for a nuanced understanding by the audience.
Addressing concerns about du Plessis’ ability to handle championship rounds, Sanko admitted she would have favored Strickland in a longer fight but commended the new champion for showcasing an impressive gas tank and performance in the later rounds. This adaptability adds to du Plessis’ profile as a complete fighter.
In the broader context, Sanko touched on Strickland’s defensive style and how it occasionally hampers his ability to push the pace. She compared Strickland to Jorge Masvidal, noting his inclination towards enjoying the fight and less concern for scoring criteria.
While Strickland officially lost the fight and the middleweight title, Sanko acknowledged his noteworthy performances and the positive perception he gained in the court of public opinion. The analysis provides insights into the nuances of MMA judging criteria, the significance of immediate damage, and the evolving landscape of high-stakes championship bouts.