Mairon Santos Claims UFC 313 Loss To Francis Marshall Was Incorrect

Axel S�rensen

4 min read

Post on May 19, 2025

4.7

Share

Santos' Arguments for an Incorrect Decision

Key Moments of the Fight

Mairon Santos argues that he clearly dominated significant portions of the fight against Francis Marshall. His claim rests on a detailed analysis of several key rounds:

• Round 1: Santos claims he landed significantly more significant strikes, controlling the distance and utilizing effective combinations. He also points to a near-submission attempt late in the round.
• Round 2: Santos emphasizes his superior ground control, securing several takedowns and maintaining ground control for a considerable amount of time. He argues that his consistent pressure and dominant position should have resulted in a clear round win.
• Round 3: While acknowledging Marshall's moments of offense, Santos contends that he still landed more significant strikes and maintained superior control time. He highlights a period where he landed a flurry of punches that visibly hurt Marshall.

Santos believes the judges failed to adequately weight the significant strikes, ground control, and near submission attempts, crucial elements in MMA scoring. He argues he outscored Marshall in all three areas combined.

Inconsistencies in Judging

Santos' team points to several judging discrepancies in the scorecards. They argue that the scoring failed to reflect the consistent pressure and effective offense displayed by Santos throughout the fight. Specifically, they highlight:

• The apparent disregard for Santos' superior takedown defense and successful takedown attempts.
• The inconsistent scoring of rounds, where seemingly dominant performances by Santos were scored in favor of Marshall.
• A potential lack of understanding of the MMA judging criteria, particularly in evaluating grappling exchanges and control time.

The scoring inconsistencies led to a significant public outcry on social media and various MMA forums, with many fans and analysts echoing Santos' concerns. Many commentators cite the MMA judging criteria as being too subjective and prone to inconsistent application.

Evidence Supporting Santos' Claim

Santos' claim isn't just based on his own perspective. Supporting evidence includes:

• A detailed fight analysis by several respected MMA commentators, who independently corroborated Santos' assessment of the fight's key moments.
• Statistical evidence from FightMetric, showcasing the disparity in significant strikes landed and control time. Links to these statistics (if available) will be added here.
• A video review of the fight is circulating online, highlighting the points where Santos feels the judges missed key moments. [Link to Video Review (if available)]

This cumulative expert opinion and video review adds weight to Santos' claim that the fight result was inaccurate.

Francis Marshall's Response (if applicable)

Marshall's Counterarguments

At the time of writing, Francis Marshall hasn't issued a formal statement directly responding to Santos' allegations. However, his post-fight interview hinted that he felt he had done enough to win.

Marshall's Team's Statement (if applicable)

No official statement has been released by Marshall's team or management regarding the controversy.

The Potential for an Appeal or Rematch

UFC's Response and Potential Actions

The UFC is yet to publicly comment on Santos’ claim for a review. The process for appealing a UFC fight result is notoriously opaque, and the possibility of an UFC appeal is uncertain. However, given the level of public debate, the possibility of a rematch cannot be entirely dismissed.

Precedents for Controversial Decisions

The history of the UFC is replete with controversial UFC fights and previous appeals. While rare, rematches have been granted in the past based on exceptionally compelling evidence of judging errors or blatant misinterpretations of the rules. Examining precedents like [cite examples of previous controversial UFC decisions] could shed light on the likelihood of action in Santos' case.

Conclusion

Mairon Santos' claim that his UFC 313 loss to Francis Marshall was incorrect is based on a compelling argument supported by evidence including a detailed fight analysis, statistical data, and video review. While Francis Marshall and the UFC have yet to respond fully, the public outcry highlights a crucial issue concerning MMA judging and its impact on fighter careers. The Mairon Santos vs. Francis Marshall controversy has re-ignited the debate on improving transparency and consistency in MMA judging. Do you think Mairon Santos deserves a rematch, or what are your thoughts on the UFC 313 judging controversy? Let us know in the comments below! Share your thoughts on the UFC 313 controversy and the Mairon Santos vs. Francis Marshall debate using #UFCMMAJudging.