What were the judges watching last night?

marksmen

Brown Belt
@Brown
Joined
Jul 23, 2008
Messages
3,456
Reaction score
16
The first three fights on main card I had going to the "loser". Pettis vs Moraga was close but at least shoulda been a split decision. I thought Court won 2 and 3 and lost a UD. Then of course the fight where even Lauzon admitted he shoulda lost. Terrible judging. Thoughts?
 
I don't understand why you think a fight should be a split decision.
 
It happens on every card. The only solution to the problem is to get rid of the 10 point system.

K1 did it right. If the fight is pretty close after 3 rounds, the judges can agree to make a fourth round. If that round is pretty close, they can make a fifth round. No more robberies. The best fighter will mostly win.
 
Take away 10% of purse every round that passes and it fixes a lot of ignorant judging.
 
It happens on every card. The only solution to the problem is to get rid of the 10 point system.

K1 did it right. If the fight is pretty close after 3 rounds, the judges can agree to make a fourth round. If that round is pretty close, they can make a fifth round. No more robberies. The best fighter will mostly win.


Getting rid of the ten point must system won't fix incompetence.

Those fights were easy to score under ten point must.

The problem is that a lot of these guys have no business judging fights.
 
They should have an open scoring system like in k1, maybe that could help
 
It happens on every card. The only solution to the problem is to get rid of the 10 point system.

K1 did it right. If the fight is pretty close after 3 rounds, the judges can agree to make a fourth round. If that round is pretty close, they can make a fifth round. No more robberies. The best fighter will mostly win.
Pettis def won no matter how you judge it.
Saunders lost but it was somewhat close.

However no amount of rule changing will justify Lauzon winning that fight(he got screwed last fight vs Miller tho).
It's hard to even blame incompetency there unless they thought Lauzon was the name of the guy on top.
 
Getting rid of the ten point must system won't fix incompetence.

Those fights were easy to score under ten point must.

The problem is that a lot of these guys have no business judging fights.

Pettis def won no matter how you judge it.
Saunders lost but it was somewhat close.

However no amount of rule changing will justify Lauzon winning that fight(he got screwed last fight vs Miller tho).
It's hard to even blame incompetency there unless they thought Lauzon was the name of the guy on top.

I think that is exactly What it will do: get rid of incompetence.

3 judges stick their heads together And show their cards "that was pretty close!" "I thought fighter A won". Yeah, I scored it for him too, but maybe we should have another round, because it was pretty close?" "Sure" "yeah, why not"
 
Hilariously, all my picks except penn won.

However ben and joe should not have won.
 
Sucks for Marcin who took the ground fight to Joe and dominated
 
Agree on fights 2 and 3. I had Pettis winning pretty easily.
 
Pure class by J-Lau knowingly and admitted defeat. How many fighters would ever say that

Hope the keep Held, he had plenty of lesser LWs he coulda started off with and now he needs one
 
Back
Top