UFC News: Hamill vs. Bisping Judges Explanations

ufc 75 judges

ufc 75 judges

In light of the controversial fight between Matt Hamill and Michel Bisping, two of the judges who scored the fight for Bisping have spoken out to the media. American Judges Cecil Peoples and Jeff Mullen both scored the fight 29-28 for Bisping, while Englishman Chris Watts scored the fight 30-27 for Hamill. A important note, England has no regulatory commission, so the UFC was in charge of hiring the judges as well and drug testing for UFC 75. Here’s what the judges had to say:

Quote From UFC 75 Judge Cecil Peoples obtained by the fight network.

“I gave Bisping the second round, first because Hamill was beginning to run out of gas after the first round. Bisping fought like he wanted that fight. He came back aggressive [from the first round]. Hamill did take him down, but he did nothing with the takedown. Overall, Bisping was more aggressive. Hamill just held him down. Bisping’s punching was more effective.”

Post by UFC 75 Judge Jeff Mullen explaining his scoring of the controversial fight between Matt Hamill vs. Michael Bisping:

“Hello to everyone on the Underground. I have been reading the underground for years. I used to post quite a bit. Then I decided it would be better for me to stay out of all the arguments. I want to thank all of you guys for being so nice to me through the years. I have seen almost no negative posts about me here until now. I first started judging the UFC in 1996. I have been judging UFC almost twice as long as any other active judge. I am a former kick boxer and have been training grappling for 13 years. I am not here to argue with any of you or tell you that your opinion is wrong. I am only going to tell you why I judged the fight the way I did. Watch the fight again and turn off the sound. Commentary can color what you see. No doubt Hamill dominated the 1st. He hurt Bisping with a right hand right off the bat and again near the end of the round. He out scored Bisping and busted him up. It was a very impressive round for Hamill but still a 10-9 round. Not dominate enough for a 10-8. Watch the beginning of the second round closely. When Hamill throws the jab, Bisping slips the punch and hits him with his own counter jab. It is hard to see on camera because Hamill’s back is to the camera. His back was also to Goldie who was talking like the beginning of this round was like a continuation of the 1st. If you look you will see that Hamill is facing me giving me a clear view of what is landing. Bisping was landing the jab again and again and not getting hit. Hamill got 2 takedowns in rounds 2 and 3 but did very little with them. Bisping is using an active guard trying to turn for armbars and sweeps, Hamill is doing very little on top. Bisping is keeping him from scoring or improving his position. In the 3rd round Bisping actually lands more punchesd from the bottom than Hamill does from the top. In both the 2nd and 3rd rounds Bisping does more scoring. Striking. Under pride style scoring Hamill would have won. He did more damage, but it was all in the 1st round. By 10 point must system Bisping won the fight 2 rounds to 1 . 29-28 Bisping. Sometime the angle you see the fight effects your decision. That is why they put the judges on 3 different sides. BY THE WAY MARIO YAMASAKI THOUGHT BISPING WON ROUNDS 2 AND 3 ALSO. MARIO WAS THE REF AND HAD A BETTER VIEW THAN ANY OF US. I have never taken a payoff as some of you have suggested and never will. You may not agree with my decision but please don’t question my honesty. Thank you Jeff Mullen”


  1. crynot

    September 10, 2007 at 7:38 am

    I just watched the fight again (without sound) and I can see the third round going either way, but there is (and this is my opinion) NO WAY Bisbing won that second round. NO WAY! Hamill landed way more shots and got two take downs. JUNK!!!!!!

  2. Morey

    September 10, 2007 at 7:46 am

    I agree that Hamill did not do much on the ground other than hold Bisping down. He looked like he was exhausted for some reason, or just didnt look aggressive in the third. Then at the end of the fight he hunched over like he was going to puke. I think he lost because he looked like he lost, even though he did more damage and dominated the positioning in the ring.

  3. crynot

    September 10, 2007 at 9:23 am

    Yeah, but did you see Bisbing. He was exhausted as well. We've seen tons of fighters who are spent by the end of the third. Whether he was about to puke or not, he still landed more jabs and dominated in the 1st and 2nd at least.

  4. abel

    September 10, 2007 at 10:52 am

    i dont question the judges honesty just their eyesight.

    bisping backpeddeled most of the fight hamill was the agressor throughout, and made the fight. no way bisping won the second round

  5. john

    September 10, 2007 at 12:58 pm

    jeff mullen BULLLLLLL SHIT that's all i can say to you

  6. robert

    September 10, 2007 at 2:09 pm

    Seems like Mullen is defending his lousy judging. I'M SURE YAMASAKI APPRECIATED HIS NAME BEING MENTIONED AS WELL. Is Yamasaki or Mullen the JUDGE here?

  7. Rev

    September 10, 2007 at 2:26 pm

    What a joke!!! Mullen is full of it!!

  8. Morey

    September 10, 2007 at 3:07 pm

    they guy doesnt talk about agression or ring control which you are also suppost to judge on. Hamill controlled the pace and had Bisping backing up and looking for counters…he took the fight to the ground and used headlocks while in close…if thats not agression and ring control, then what is. I do agree that Hamill was not very active on the ground.

  9. robert

    September 10, 2007 at 7:55 pm

    Neither Hammel or Bisping were effective on the ground. However, Hammel's take down after take down of Bisping still score points. This is Tito v. Griffin again. No more UFC for me. Dana, you got caught this time again! Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. Had enough!

  10. Dave

    September 11, 2007 at 5:11 am

    Was abit of a joke, i believe Bisping did land more effective striking and that Hamill did no damage on the ground, UFC has always awarded points for takedowns though so Hamill should have won.

    Its time UFC became about finding the Ultimate Fighter its not all about the fans and making money on pay per view.

  11. Vinnyvette

    September 18, 2007 at 11:18 am

    Hammel got robbed! big time. That was a bunch aof BS!

  12. Mikey

    September 18, 2007 at 4:04 pm

    Hamill had a torn ACL during the whole fight, no wonder he walked around so slow. He's going to be out for a while with surgery, so we wont see this rematch anytime soon…or ever if Bisping grows a brain and drops down a weightclass.

  13. Dougie

    September 19, 2007 at 2:16 am

    that 3rd round was close. it was close because bisping was using all he had because he was desperate – he lost the first two rounds. he knew that – and everybody knows that. this was a sham. the ufc does not need nonsense like this. boo

  14. onie

    September 19, 2007 at 7:48 am

    I dont get why eveyone is so pissed. Yeah, maybe Hamill got screwed, but he didnt dominate as much as people thought. There have been so many worse calls in boxing and even in MMA (like Forrest vs. Ortiz). Get over it, it wasnt that bad and they will fight each other again anyway.

    Hamill will learn more from the loss anyway, he needs to work his ground and pound. Bisping was on top fo the world and cocky as hell…bet he is as pissed off now as Appollo Creed in Rocky. See, it all worked out for the best anyway so stop bitching about the judges.

  15. Mark

    September 22, 2007 at 8:54 am

    No way Bisping won. None. I suspect we're being hookedinto watching (paying to watch) a much hyped rematch. This was a plain and simple sham. Bisping is the money-maker for Dana and the gang. Can't have a UFC Poster Boy that's deaf and doesn't speak well, no can we…?

    What a shame, Hamill pounded Bisping. The UFC pounded it's fans.

  16. st8

    September 22, 2007 at 2:28 pm

    What a joke. Hamill won hands down. Everyone who knows their ass from a hole in the ground saw that. Bisping got the hometown decision.

  17. Leet

    September 22, 2007 at 3:08 pm

    yes, hamill did win…can we drop it now.

  18. dave

    September 23, 2007 at 10:45 pm

    well there isn't really too much to say. Hamill won that fight and there is no doubt about it. since when is how tired the fighter is after a 3 round bout a factor in scoring? that's ridiculous. I like both fighters, i really do… but c'mon, that was straight bullshit

  19. Alex

    October 1, 2007 at 1:29 pm

    I've watched the fight 3 times (once with the sound down) and I'm convinced the judging was skewed. Whether they were trying to curry favour with the Brits. (funny how the British judge scored it correctly-very convenient and touching) or trying to justify their ultimate fighter, god only knows. I'm British, by the way.

  20. Lindsay

    April 20, 2009 at 1:25 pm

    Bisping beat Hamill??? What a joke! The only way to explain the two judges giving the fight to Bisping is that those dumbasses thought Bisping was the deaf guy! Did Vince McMahon just purchase the MMA??? That decision was right out of the World Wrestling Entertainment.

  21. dane drebin

    April 20, 2009 at 1:37 pm

    lol this fight was so long ago why are u still talking about it?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>