Tom Aspinall Eye Poke: Why This Foul Wins 74% of MMA Fights

Several years back, Joe Rogan made a plea to his listeners: “Can somebody please find out how eye pokes affect the outcome of a match?” Well, someone did — and the results are damning.

The Steven Rivers Study: Poke to Win

MMA journalist Steven Rivers analyzed 100 UFC fights containing eye pokes (from UFC 110 to approximately UFC 198) and published his findings in 2016. The article has since been taken down, but I found it on the Wayback Machine. Here’s what he discovered:

• 53% of fights ended with the eye poker winning
• 35% saw the victim overcome the eye poke to win
• 12% ended in draws or both fighters getting poked

That’s already significant — the eye poke victim wins only about one-third of the time. But it gets worse.

First Round Eye Pokes: 74% Win Rate for the Poker

When the eye poke happens in the first round, the poker goes on to win 74% of the time.

That’s a massive statistical advantage. Examples from the study include:

• Joanna Jędrzejczyk vs Claudia Gadelha — Joanna poked Gadelha’s eyes in rounds one and two, then won by decision
• UFC Fight Night: Gustafsson vs Manuwa — Multiple eye pokes across the card, with Jimi Manuwa getting poked in round two before being finished
• UFC 159 — Eye pokes were so prevalent that two fights (Saint Preux vs Villante, Belcher vs Bisping) were stopped as a direct result

The Repeat Offenders

Michael Bisping appeared in five fights with eye pokes during the study period — sometimes as the poker, sometimes as the victim.

Jon Jones made the list three times with pokes against Gustafsson, Teixeira, and Cormier. Though it should be noted he had nine straight wins without eye pokes before the Gustafsson fight.

Jones himself has been honest about his approach:

“I do poke people in the eyes, and it’s very illegal, but I do it. It’s like if someone’s coming at me, I’ll just put my hand on their forehead… and sometimes it lands in people’s eyes. People say ‘Jon, you’re a very talented fighter. You don’t need to use an illegal tactic to be successful.’ I try to tell people it’s not intentional, but now I’m kind of known for it, and it’s working.”

The Tom Aspinall Situation

This brings us to the recent Tom Aspinall vs Ciryl Gane incident. Aspinall caught flak for not continuing after getting poked in both eyes. Critics said since there was no “catastrophic eye injury,” he should have toughed it out.

But consider the statistics: fighters poked in the first round lose 74% of the time. Aspinall had been waiting for this title opportunity for years. Should he really risk his belt, future earnings, and career by fighting one of the best strikers in the division with compromised depth perception?

The Referee Problem

Part of the problem is that after eye pokes, we ask fighters whether they want to continue. Most fighters will try to tough it out — that’s their mental makeup. Kevin Holland pleading the Fifth after a groin shot, refusing to say yes or no, probably cost him his match.

The original article suggested cageside doctors should intervene more. But how do you test someone’s vision in the heat of the moment? “Can you see my face?” “Yes.” That doesn’t mean they can track a punch coming at 30 mph.

Correlation or Causation?

The article acknowledges this is correlation, not necessarily causation. Maybe eye poking is just part of a win-at-all-costs mentality. Fighters who poke might simply be more aggressive and determined overall.

But the 74% first-round statistic is hard to ignore. Something about getting poked early — whether it’s vision impairment, lost confidence, or mental disruption — correlates strongly with losing.

The Bottom Line

Eye pokes aren’t just annoying fouls — they’re statistically correlated with winning. Until the UFC implements real consequences (automatic point deductions, fines, or better referee positioning), this “accidental” foul will continue to influence outcomes.

As the data shows: if you want to win, apparently you’ve got to poke some eyes out.