POLL: Who Do You Think Won At Bellator 120?


Bellator 120 went down tonight (Sat., May 17, 2014) from the Landers Center in Southaven, Mississippi, marking the promotion’s first foray into pay-per-view (PPV).

While the event suffered a huge blow when lightweight champion Eddie Alvarez was forced out of his awaited rubber match with Michael Chandler, lightweight contender Will Brooks proved he could hang with the best by taking home the interim strap with a split decision.

It was a back-an-forth battle that saw each fighter in serious trouble at different points throughout, and the decision could have gone either way.

For the evening’s Quinton “Rampage” Jackson vs. Muhammed “King Mo” Lawal headliner, the story unfolded as promised with “King Mo” using his vaunted wrestling to repeatedly take “Rampage” to the ground. However, he did nothing with the positional advantage, and Jackson actually showed a great gas tank by getting back to his feet many times.

In the stand-up, it was clear that “Rampage’s” boxing was doing much more damage than anything Lawal could muster, but the former UFC champ also missed with a ton of lunging power shots. The fight, like most of the recent bouts that have been heavy on trash talk, just failed to live up to the massive hype set forth by the build-up.

In any case, the fights themselves came down to some razor thin results. Who do think deserved to win at Bellator 120?

  • I thought the decisions went the right way. MO didn't do any damage whatsoever on the ground, and maybe only won the first round. Chandler gave his back REPEATEDLY to Brooks and he took advantage..was a good fight but I had Brooks winning 3-2.

  • Is it just me or did both of them seem like they hadn't trained to fight each other? Mo had pretty much nothing for Rampage's striking and didn't even seem to be trying to grind him very hard; Rampage seemed to have forgotten that Mo is a boring wrestler these days and had some of the worst cage/distance awareness and takedown defense I've seen from him.

  • Huge Rampage fan , but King Mo got robbed

  • Rampage won (rounds 2 and 3). King Mo did get a take down in the 3rd but Rampage had Octagon control (by far the aggressor making the fight happen) with King Mo constantly fleeing from him when TD attempts failed. King Mo was not robbed, he got what he deserved! You want the win, then you've got to be aggressive and take it! You don't win a fight by running away from one.

  • Both fights probably should have gone the other way. I really could care less about the Mo-Rampage fight, but Chandler-Brooks had serious pressure and the wrong decision hurts plans down the line.

    Judging is a tough gig, and it really is highly dependant on opinion. But, Will simply didn't do enough to win the 5th round, which was the deciding round of the fight.

    • I agree Evan. I'm a big rampage fan but I thought Mo stole it with the takedowns. Also, the second round could have gone either way for me.

      As for Will Brooks. He took way less damage but lost the first two rounds and arguably lost the 5th. He also didn't finish when he had clear opportunities. He lacks that high level killer instinct. Chandler has more killer instinct but less ability. I remember Chandler leaving his neck exposed when Will had his back and leaving his body exposed for knees to finish the fight in the 5th and Will didn't see or try to take advantage of any of those openings.

      With all that said the fight still wasn't a bad spectacle and those dudes could hang with the UFC lightweights floating around the top 10 no problems.

    • Ya, I defs thought Chandler won round 5 but I had the fight as a draw. That third round really should've been 10-8 Brooks, when u come that close to finishing a guy that can't be scored the same as say round 5 was.

  • Takedowns without damage are meaningless in a fight. Maybe they count in a wrestling match but fights need damage.

  • I agree with both decisions. Chandler was who I had to win but he had his a*s handed to him. King Mo did nothing but score take downs and that is not a fight even if you stay there on top for the whole round but the guy on the bottom scores more shots and does more damage then the guy on the bottom should win as being on your back is part of MMA and should not be considered a disadvantage unless you are losing from there.