In a controversial decision, Darren Elkins defeated Michihiro Omigawa at UFC 131: Carwin vs. dos Santos. Despite most observers believing Omigawa had done enough to win the fight (including UFC President Dana White), the judges - all former professional fighters - scored the bout 29-28, 29-28, 30-27 in favor of Elkins. This prompted White to lash out at the judges and pay Omigawa the bonus portion of his purse that's normally awarded after a win.
Jonathan Tweedale, the Commissioner of the Vancouver Athletic Commission, reached out to SB Nation MMA and offered the following comment regarding the Elkins vs. Omigawa bout as well as the subsequent decision. Tweedale's comment, in full, is below:
"In the first round, Elkins backed Omigawa up with punches the entire round. He controlled the center of the cage. He was throwing a lot more shots, and landing more -- and in combination. If there is any controversy as to the outcome of the fight it must be because of the second round. That was a very challenging round to score. An argument can be made in favour of either fighter. Elkins landed more punches. At one point, when Omigawa came forward, he was stopped dead in his tracks by Elkins' combination punches, and at another point he was slightly buckled. Due to Omigawa's unusual stance and balance, it was difficult to tell exactly whether he was rocked by some of these shots. However, you could see Omigawa's leg bend, and the control shift to Elkins as he landed the combo, stopping Omigawa in his tracks, taking the center of the cage, and going on the attack again. These sequences, as well as the total effective strikes landed, could reasonably warrant awarding the round to Elkins. Elkins didn't land many more than Omigawa, but he did land more. (The Fightmetric numbers agree.) As to the blood - it represents something, but a cut can be caused by a glancing blow and some fighters just cut more readily than others.
That's a round about which reasonable people can disagree. Close rounds like Round 2 of Omigawa vs Elkins serve as useful examples for discussion, to assist in refining and evolving the community's understanding of the scoring criteria, generally. And that is a good thing for the sport."