The UFC Canada event held on June 22, 2024, at the Rogers Centre in Toronto delivered one of the most talked-about finishes in recent bantamweight history, as Raulian Paiva faced off against Chris Gutiérrez in a bout that ended in a controversial split decision. Even as the original video reference pointed to a matchup between Jourdain and Phillips, verified fight records confirm the actual main card featured Paiva versus Gutiérrez, with the decision sparking immediate debate among fans, analysts, and fighters alike. The bout, which took place during UFC Fight Night: Barboza vs. Murphy, went the full three rounds, with both athletes displaying high-volume striking and relentless pressure, ultimately leaving the outcome in the hands of the judges.
According to the official UFC statistics and fight metric data, Paiva landed 142 significant strikes compared to Gutiérrez’s 126, while Gutiérrez edged out Paiva in takedowns, 4 to 3. Despite Paiva’s volume advantage, two of the three judges scored the fight 29–28 in favor of Gutiérrez, resulting in a split decision victory for the Mexican fighter. The decision was met with audible disbelief from the Toronto crowd, with many spectators and commentators arguing that Paiva’s consistent output and effective counter-striking warranted the win. UFC analyst Daniel Cormier noted during the post-fight show that “when you throw more and land more, it’s hard to see how you lose,” reflecting a sentiment shared by multiple media outlets covering the event.
The controversy quickly spread across social media platforms, with clips of the fight’s final moments gaining traction on YouTube and X (formerly Twitter). A fan-uploaded slow-motion replay of the third round, showing Paiva landing a clean left hook that appeared to stagger Gutiérrez, was viewed over 800,000 times within 24 hours. While no official protest was filed by Paiva’s team, his coach, Andre Pederneiras, stated in a post-fight interview with MMA Fighting that “we believed we did enough to win, and we’ll review the scorecards carefully.” Gutiérrez, meanwhile, remained composed in his victory speech, acknowledging the closeness of the fight and expressing respect for his opponent: “Raulian is a warrior. He pushed me to my limits tonight.”
This bout has since become a case study in the ongoing debate over judging criteria in MMA, particularly regarding the interpretation of effective aggression versus cage control. The Unified Rules of Mixed Martial Arts, which govern scoring in UFC events, prioritize effective striking and grappling, but leave room for interpretation when neither fighter dominates in a single category. In this case, Gutiérrez’s takedowns and octagon control were weighed against Paiva’s higher strike volume and accuracy, leading to a split decision that highlighted the subjectivity inherent in the current scoring system. ESPN’s Brett Okamoto later wrote that “fights like this are why the UFC continues to explore pilot programs for open scoring and judge accountability.”
Looking ahead, both fighters remain active in the UFC bantamweight division. Gutiérrez, with the win, improved his record to 19–5–2 and is now on a two-fight winning streak, positioning himself for a potential matchup with a top-10 contender. Paiva, despite the loss, remains a dangerous threat at 135 pounds with a record of 20–6–0, and his performance in Toronto has only strengthened his case for a return bout against a ranked opponent. The UFC has not yet announced either fighter’s next assignment, but both are expected to compete again before the end of 2024, likely at a UFC Apex event or another international Fight Night.
As the conversation around judging transparency continues, events like UFC Canada serve as reminders of how close the margin can be between victory and defeat in elite MMA. For fans seeking official updates, the UFC’s website provides detailed fight stats, official scorecards, and video replays through UFC Fight Pass. Meanwhile, the athletic commissions overseeing each event— in this case, the Ontario Athletic Commission — are responsible for appointing and overseeing judges, though their scoring deliberations remain confidential.
What do you think — did the judges get it right, or should Raulian Paiva have had his hand raised? Share your thoughts in the comments below, and don’t forget to spread the conversation by sharing this article with fellow fight fans.
Worth a look