Mark Volodin commented on his performance at UFC Winnipeg, disputing the judges' scoring in his loss. He believes he won the first round cleanly and the second round narrowly, with his opponent also having a point deducted. Volodin acknowledged losing the third round but contested the 10-8 scorecard, arguing it should have been 10-9 because he continued to land strikes, move forward, and win exchanges. He maintained that his performance was worthy despite the official decision.
Mark Volodin has gone on record disputing the judges' scorecards from his bout at UFC Winnipeg, arguing the official decision did not accurately reflect what happened inside the cage.
Speaking after the fight, Volodin said he believed he won the opening round clearly and edged the second round narrowly, a frame in which his opponent also had a point deducted. While he conceded the third round went against him, he pushed back on the 10-8 score he received for that period, contending it should have been scored 10-9. His reasoning was straightforward: he continued to move forward, land strikes, and win individual exchanges throughout the round, which in his view did not merit the more severe score.
Why it matters
- A successful challenge to the 10-8 scorecard could have changed the margin of the official decision, even if not the outcome.
- Volodin's comments reflect a broader conversation in MMA about how and when judges apply 10-8 rounds.
- The dispute puts the consistency of judging criteria back in focus following the event.
Volodin stopped short of calling for an official review but was clear that he felt his performance warranted more credit than the scorecards reflected. The 10-8 scoring criterion is typically reserved for rounds of near-total dominance, and Volodin's argument centers on whether that threshold was genuinely met given his continued offensive output.
