The UFC Shanghai prelims delivered plenty of action, but one result had the fans in an uproar. The judges unanimously scored the bantamweight bout between You Su-young of South Korea and Xiao Long of China as 29-28 in favor of You. The decision didn’t sit well with a large section of fans, who believed that Xiao’s late push and ferocious third round were more than enough to earn him the win.

The bout itself had a clear divide in momentum. You seized control early on, pressing forward and outlanding Xiao with higher accuracy in the first two rounds. However, the narrative shifted radically in the final seconds of the fight. Xiao Long, fueled by the energy of his home crowd, unleashed a furious torrent of elbows, almost 35 of them in a sequence, that clearly stunned his opponent. By the horn, many expected the local favorite to have completed the comeback, but the scorecards told a different story, as You Su-young defeated Xiao Long by unanimous decision (29-28, 29-28, 29-28).

UFC fans go off on judges for Xiao Long defeat

For a significant number of fans, this was nothing short of a robbery. And to make sure the UFC is aware of it, they stormed social media to let their displeasure be known. One user tweeted, “That’s absolutely ridiculous. I’m mind-blown. That third round should have easily given XIAO the victory.” Another expressed the same frustration, wondering, “What was that robbery????” Others joined in, pointing out specific occasions they felt the judges disregarded, stating, “Judges didn’t witness those elbows from Xiao?”

The most outspoken reaction was one fan’s disbelief: “Xiao definitely closed that fight out with more significant strikes. I am so confused; we witnessed robbery live on TV.” However, not everyone agreed. A smaller but firm group of fans defended the judges, claiming You’s consistency exceeded Xiao Long’s fury.

One supporter wrote, “That was a classic Xiao Long fight. Gritty, single strikes, and I could be wrong, but it seemed like got in his own head. I scored it the same as the judges, 29-28 for You.” Another emphasized the statistical edge, claiming, “Xiao Long’s inaccuracy cost him the first two rounds. They were even on strikes landed, but you were much more accurate.”

Others denied robbery charges outright: “Why would anyone think Xiao won that fight? He was striking air for 2 of the 3 rounds.” In the end, the result underscored the subjective nature of MMA judging, in which the emphasis on activity and accuracy might differ from that on power and volume.

What is certain, however, is that Xiao Long’s late rally had the crowd on their feet and left fans all over the world arguing about the conclusion. For better or worse, UFC Shanghai’s second fight of the night established the tone for an event in which emotions ran as high as the action inside the cage.