Should have been a 3rd round. Not much else to say than that. They both fought well, and both had several moments where they landed big shots and hurt the other guy. Too bad we couldn't have seen another round, because I think it would have resulted quickly like the Pachel/Cofer bout.

wtf ?!? This guy that " lost " should have WON. At most it was a draw...

In a fight that close the decision goes to the guy the refs had the best angle to see. That was fight of the night quality but I doubt Sicilia had a gas tank had there been a tie breaking round. Sicilia will probably get a fight or two in the UFC with that "loss."

Im always surprised to see people make comments about bad judging on fights that are pretty easy to score.
Saunders won in all aspects including
•Effective striking
•Effective grappling
•Octagon Control
•Effective aggressiveness
Not to mention had a near KO head kick in round 1.
Damage and Power of Punches has NOTHING to do with scoring at the moment.
Great Fight, the correct decision, Sicilia was a 1 trick pony and it showed.
Great series so far.

Edit by OP: 'Damage and Power of Punches' is a part of Effective Striking, but is easily overridden by number of effective strikes landed.

I had to watch twice the fight to understand the comments telling Saounders won. But I still don't get it.
All I saw was Sicilia giving a beating to Saunders...
ok.. The landings were pretting even but Sicilia did way more damage on every shots ( 9:18 c'mon ! )
Then on the ground... they both stood up quickly after every takedowns.
So I don't get this decision sorry.

Long Beach City baby!!! 562 All Day!!

I agree it was to close to call, I do think Saunders outscored Sicillia but Sicillia had the harder shots. I'd like to see Sicillia get a second chance.

Great fight between 2 nice guy!
Saunder was very effective with his knee to the body,but he has no jitz at all (compared to Sicilia!).So.idk why he took his back twice???...
Great decision.

A split decision after only two rounds? WTF