What was so bad about UFC 63?

[Gus Richlen Was Wrong]

I remember seeing on Wikipedia that Wrestling Observer once named UFC 63 "Worst Major Show of the Year." I never saw it, so does anyone know why it got that award?

[SassovsHart]

It was UFC 61 that got it for that year actually. Which was a show that got a lot of backlash due to the matches that were the major selling points for the card. Frank Mir in his second fight since the accident looked flabby, and not very good against a fringe fighter in Dan Christison. Ortiz and Shamrock was a fight where it was really a pretty one sides matchup at that point of Ken's career, but people got pissed and thought ended too quickly due to a controversial stoppage. The Sylvia-Arlovski trilogy in the main event after two quick finishes in their previous fights, ended in a boring, plodding 5 round decision. I'm not sure if it was actually the worst show of the year, I'd have to go back and look at other ones. But, I think there was backlash from people having this big hyped up show not deliver what they wanted in the big matches.

[zeez]

The hype for Ortiz-Shamrock 2 was huge for this event because it was coming off their coaching stint on the Ultimate Fighter. Everyone wanted a three round war between the two and the ref pulled Ortiz off after a minute. People were really pissed. They were so angry that Dana made a fight card on Spike TV just so they could show Ortiz and Shamrock fight one more time. Dana wanted to air the fight for free on cable because he felt the fans got robbed at the ppv. Dana won't do that unless he's really pissed about what happened. It's actually kinda funny because the fight on Spike almost went the exact same way except it lasted a minute longer.

So yeah, that's part of why UFC 61 sucked. That and Slyvia-Arlovski 3 was 5 rounds of two guys standing around doing next to nothing. It was awful. I think it may have set a record for least amount of strikes thrown in a fight. Ever.