Can the first UFC Bantamweight Champion return from a string of injuries that stripped him of his title, and defeat a new Champion who had stopped the dominant Renan Barao twice? And what will happen in a contest between two fighters known for their elusive footwork? And most importantly, did the judges get it right?

Are you enjoying the show? Please let us know what you think through comments on our youtube or via email at ArmchairJudges@yahoo.com, and share the episode with a friend.

Around halfway through this episode you will notice a change in the audio quality - apologies for that. Fortunately some good quality mastering software saved the day for us and it sounds ok.

Join us as we break down the strategies, the sometimes questionable advice, some key moments in Norwegian black metal for some reason, and answer the most important question;

Did the judges get it right?

If you like this episode please share it with a mate, and send us your thoughts on the fight and the scoring.

This time the Armchair Judges are taking on one of the most controversial bouts in Australian boxing history, the second fight between Anthony "the man" Mundine and Danny "the green machine" Green. Eleven years after they first met, Danny Green looks for the storybook ending to his career, with a clear narrative that he is going there to knock Mundine out early. But can Mundine defy expectations and ruin the ending? And can a couple of guys in their forties deliver an entertaining bout?

Join us as we break down a fight that proved controversial from start to finish, and determine if the referee and the judges got it right.

If you liked todays episode please share with a friend, leave a comment on our youtube channel or message us on twitter. How did you score the fight?

Today we review another fight in the classic Manny Pacquiao vs Juan Manuel Marquez series, this time breaking down and scoring the 4th bout up to the point of the stoppage.

In a series of controversial decisions, both fighters were out to end the debate with a knockout win, and delivered the most brutal fight of the series. But fittingly for the series, even a clean stoppage couldn't be left without some sort of controversy.

Join us as we score the bout to the point of the knockout, break down the tactics of each fighter, and respond to some of the claims of fans and media outlets alike.

If you would like to get in touch with the Armchair Judges you can contact us directly on twitter, our youtube channel, or at Armchairjudges@yahoo.com

It was a bout that proved controversial and polarising, and that was before it even reached the scorecards. Two of the most promising strawweight prospects meet in a fight that will change the trajectory of both of their careers, and change the future of the entire division. Can Joanna do enough to overcome Claudia's relentless takedowns? Can Claudia survive the striking of former 5-time Muay Thai world champion Joanna?

And most importantly, did the judges get it right?

If you're enjoying the show, please share with a mate, and let us know how you scored the fight. You can get in touch with us through our youtube page (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC_bPwA3AxmobGtH5M2YIUUQ) or at Armchairjudges@yahoo.com

But was he?

The Armchair Judges return to critique the second bout between two of the UFC's kings of controversy, when Conor McGregor avenged his shock second round defeat at the hands of Nate Diaz.

Both fighters predicted that they would dominate in a rematch that proved to have far reaching consequences for both fighters, both in MMA and beyond. But did the bout really indicate a greater potential for either fighter? Was it the classic fight that many of us remembered it to be?

And most importantly, did the official judges get it right?

If you're enjoying the show, please share it with a friend, or you can help support us by dropping by our youtube channel and leaving a like on one of our clips. You can also reach out to us with suggestions for bouts that we should cover via comments on our youtube, or by email at Armchairjudges@yahoo.com

Join Ben, Trev and Aidan to discuss how the fight changed the UFC and the Ultimate Fighter, whether it still holds up as an all-time great fight, and how much MMA has changed since its defining moment.

And most importantly, did the official judges get it right?

Did you like this episode or any of our others? You can help our podcast out by sharing it with a friend, or you can get in touch with us by commenting on any of our youtube videos or emailing us at ArmchairJudges@yahoo.com.

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC_bPwA3AxmobGtH5M2YIUUQ/

With Jones returning from his Heavyweight title win he is carrying some incredible momentum, but will a difficult weight cut to return to Light Heavyweight derail his efforts against Tarver? Or can he hold on enough to earn the victory?

And most importantly, did the official judges get it right?

If you would like us to review any particular fights, get in touch at armchairjudges@yahoo.com, or leave a comment on one of our youtube videos.

The Armchair Judges return with their toughest test, a review of the polarising first bout between Saul Canelo Alvarez and GGG, Gennady Golovkin. Things start to get out of hand as the fellas have a bit too much to drink throughout the episode, leading to as much of a drama-show in this episode as GGG wanted for the fight itself.

Will they be able to resolve their differences? Will the argument turn into a genuine bout as well? And most importantly, did the official judges get it right?

If you have any ideas for controversial decisions or stoppages you would like us to review, then please email us at armchairjudges@yahoo.com , or leave a comment on one of our youtube videos.