UFC 133 Fight Card: Was Hendricks vs Pierce a Controversial Decision?

Cody SlovenskyContributor IIAugust 6, 2011

Johny Hendricks and Mike Pierce put on a classic, wrestler-versus-wrestler performance in their bout at UFC 133. Both men tested with their grappling, but the majority of the fight stayed on the feet. In all actuality, that fight could've went either way, but at the end of the day, it appears the judges were correct on this one.

Round 1, was a feeling out process. Hendricks landed a couple of take downs but couldn't hold Pierce down. On the feet, Hendricks landed the better of the shots and had three major combinations that truly stuck out, which secured him the round.

Round 2 was extremely close. Pierce landed the better combinations on the feet, but Hendricks would always answer back. Then, there was a temporary stoppage for an "illegal" up kick (Pierce did not have a knee on the ground). After that moment, Hendricks went off and exploded to close the round, and arguably take the round, and when doing a full analysis, he did win the round.

Round 3 was closer than many stated. Pierce landed a solid take down, but the problem with that is, is the fact that he did nothing and just laid on top; he didn't advance position or try to land many shots. That take down could've locked up the fight, but as the round closed, Hendricks controlled, and even though there is a solid chance that Pierce for sure took that round, it was still close.

Overall, it was a good fight; Hendricks landed better on the feet and controlled the majority of the fight. There is no argument for a split decision, because that was extremely close, but in this case, the judges were correct.