Melissa Gatto disputes the scorecards after UFC Vegas 122 majority draw with Ernesta Kareckaite

Melissa Gatto left UFC Vegas 122 frustrated with how her fight was scored. In her women’s flyweight bout against Ernesta Kareckaite, the result went to the judges in a way that left Gatto disagreeing with the outcome, even though the official decision was not a loss. The fight produced a majority draw, a result that reflects how at least one judge viewed the contest differently from the other two.

According to the reported scorecards, Gatto and Kareckaite were evaluated across three rounds with two judges scoring the bout even at 28-28. The third judge produced a 29-27 card. The overall majority draw outcome came after a key scoring swing in the early portion of the fight, when Kareckaite lost a point in the first round.

Point deductions can change how a fight is scored even when the round-to-round judging looks close, because the standard 10-point must system generally leaves an extra scoring margin when a fighter is docked. In this case, the reported first-round point loss is part of what shaped how the 28-28 and 29-27 totals were reached. With two even cards, the judges’ reads suggested a competitive exchange across the rounds, but not one unified view of who did enough to take control.

Gatto’s reaction, as described in coverage of the event, focused on the scorecards themselves. She said she was upset with the judges, an assessment that underscores how a majority draw can be more than just a bureaucratic outcome. For fighters, it becomes a question of credibility, momentum, and how future matchups may be justified, especially when a bout includes a point deduction that can make the margins feel technical rather than purely reflective of control.

The timing of the upset matters as well. At this stage of UFC matchmaking, results that land as draws often generate a different kind of decision-making than a clear win or loss. While the record book records the majority draw, the perception of who “should” have won can influence how quickly either fighter returns to the cage against an adjacent opponent. Gatto’s public dispute, therefore, is not only emotional. It becomes part of the ongoing narrative that UFC officials and matchmakers tend to weigh when deciding what a rematch, a new opponent, or a new direction should look like.

The bout also highlights how UFC Vegas events continue to feature outcomes that can be tight even when specific moments, such as penalties, shift the scoring. Kareckaite’s point loss in the first round suggests the fight included enough rule issues or referee interventions to affect the numerical totals. That kind of detail is often what causes a judge’s card to diverge, turning a contest that may feel “close” from one perspective into a different conclusion from another.

Going forward, the most immediate storyline is how UFC officials and the fight community interpret what happened on the scorecards. With two 28-28 cards, there was a clear split between the judges’ perceptions of who won enough to separate the bout. With Gatto openly disputing the decision, the next UFC steps for her and Kareckaite may depend on whether the promotion views the draw as a resolution or as a reason to revisit the matchup quickly.

For fans, UFC Vegas 122’s Gatto-Kareckaite draw is a reminder that judging outcomes can hinge on small scoring differences, and that even when a fighter does not lose, the way the fight is quantified can still feel like the deciding factor. The public response from Gatto sets up a question that will likely follow the bout: whether this should be treated as a settled matter or the beginning of a longer campaign toward a definitive result.