Did the Judge Get It Right? Examining the 10-8 Score in Grasso vs. Shevchenko Round 5

UFC judge Mike Bell caused a major stir in the MMA community with his controversial scorecard for Alexa Grasso vs. Valentina Shevchenko at Noche UFC on September 16.

Bell, with the deciding card for the bout, scored round five as a 10-8 for Grasso, causing the fight to be a split draw.

The controversy arose because Shevchenko had won most of the round, only to lose control in the final moments of the fight when Grasso managed to secure a minute and a half of ground control and deliver a series of ground-and-pound strikes. "Bullet" was visibly distressed and Grasso came close to securing a TKO.

Let's take a look at the Nevada Rules of Unarmed Combat to see whether 10-8 was a viable score for Grasso v. Shevchenko round five:

"If an unarmed combatant wins the round by a large margin, the winning unarmed combatant receives 10 points, and the losing unarmed combatant receives 8 points."

A 10-8 round is determined by three key factors: 1) The fighter must dominate the round in terms of action, 2) this domination should be sustained over a significant duration, and 3) the fighter "Impacted his or her opponent with effective strikes or effective grappling manoeuvres, or both, that diminished the abilities of his or her opponent."

It could be argued that Grasso matched two of these three prerequisites, she 1) dominated over a sustained duration, and 2) impacted Shevchenko with strikes and grappling. It all depends on whether Shevchenko's earlier success mitigated those final minutes in the eyes of the judge.

"A score of a 10-8 round does not require an unarmed combatant to dominate or to impact his or her opponent, or both, for the entire round.

"...In determining whether to score a round as a 10-8 round, a judge shall evaluate the three factors of impact, dominance and duration. If the judge assesses that two of the three factors are present, the judge shall seriously consider whether to score the round as a 10-8 round. If all three factors are present, the judge shall score the round as a 10-8 round."

So in favor of Grasso 10-8 Rd. 5, she didn't need to dominate all of the round, just part of it. Bell "seriously considered" the 10-8 after seeing the impact and dominance from Grasso in the final moments of the round and decided to award her a dominant round.

Does this warrant a 10-8 round? Maybe Mike Bell is just following the rulebook more consistently than other judges, and perhaps fans should expect to see more 10-8 scores for rounds resembling this one.

Upon closer examination of the rules, it appears that a Grasso 10-8 scorecard might not be as unconventional as it initially appears. The perception of it being unusual could be attributed to the infrequency of 10-8 scorecards in UFC fights, which could create a cognitive bias among viewers. In reality, there could be a greater number of fights where 10-8 scores are warranted.