10 - 8's are a joke

[TheHabitualLineStepper]

Where are you getting this 'should' shit? In boxing, where the 10 point must was taken from, generally speaking you lose a point for getting knocked down. So getting knocked down in a round is almost a guaranteed 10-8.

Boxing and MMA are two different sports with totally different scoring criteria, did you know?

 

[JoeRowe]

Khabib (and his style) says otherwise. Holding someone down from the start and dealing out damage (gnp) the entire round is CERTAINLY grounds for a 10-8.

Edgar/Maynard rd-1 is a great example of a standup 10-8

Competent judges get it and from what I've seen a TRUE 10-8 is usually scored correct. (Note "USUALLY")


Which other fight rounds are you considering "obvious" 10-8's that weren't scored correctly???

Round 1 should have been a 10-7

 

[JoeRowe]

Exactly. The commentary was saying Usman Colby round 2 should be 10-8, wtf??

10-8 should be rounds where the fighter is totally dominated, Dana White even said that himself.

There it is guys, case settled. Dana said it so we must accept it as gospel

 

[TheHabitualLineStepper]

There it is guys, case settled. Dana said it so we must accept it as gospel

Who said because Dana said it it's therefore gospel, cunt?

 

[snugglecakes]

Need decimal points to confuse judges even more. I give that round a 10-8.8

 

[ShreddinMMA]

The fact commentators bring it up so much now is pretty disappointing.

10-8s were always pretty obvious, as it usually was when one fighter got absolutely dominated. It's fucking ridiculous Paul Felder doesn't seem to know how to score a 10-8 well. More unjustified 10-8s seem to be given out now than ever.

 

[Rear Naked Toke]

You can fix the criteria all you want but it won't mean shit with incompetent judges, which has never been properly addressed during the entire history of the sport, boxing too for that matter.

Which is crazy, considering it has been constantly addressed by fans, media, fighters, commentators, and promoters since the inception of MMA judges.

Boxing is out of control in almost every department.

 

[EYEKICKFACES]

I agree, commentators shouldn't be talking about how they're scoring the fight, it's above their pay grade.

We watch the fight for the entertainment, not about how they score the fights or how a girls hips reminds them of a hoola hoop ffs.

Agreed. It would also be nice if they quit saying "he's hurt, this could be stopped" after every decent strike that lands too.

 

[Local Plata]

Boxing and MMA are two different sports with totally different scoring criteria, did you know?

I was giving an example using historical knowledge of the system. Get banned again you scrub tool.

 

[Th3Sav4ge]

i always liked in mma that someone can get dropped or rocked and still win the round. but there does need to be something set in stone. imo its comon sense what should be a 10-8, but i guess thats to much to ask these days

 

[BigGing]

The problem is nothing is consistent, the rules change state from state, and some judges just put marbles up their ass

 

[Jitter]

Agreed. It would also be nice if they quit saying "he's hurt, this could be stopped" after every decent strike that lands too.

Yes this is really annoying. My pet peeve is when they start saying "oh that's really deep" and sometimes before they even finish saying it the fighter is out of the sub already

 

[NoBiasJustMMA]

Sick of hearing "that could be a 10-8" by the commentary. It never is.
It's so hard to get a 10-8 that by the time you get one you've essentially won the fight anyway.

It would be so easy to implement, if you get 2 knockdowns in a round or deal double the damage/output of your opponent that should be a 10-8.

Either make 10-8 rounds achievable or just get rid of them.

10-8 shouldn't be limited to only striking you can get a 10-8 round via grappling dominance but it usually requires multiple sub attempts and a lot of time on top in side control, back control or mount.

 

[swarrrm]

8's need to be way more common and 7 should be the new 8.

 

[Jorge Luis Borges]

Scoring is and always will be a matter of opinion. That's why even if a fighter I love loses a decision that I feel they won, I accept it and move on. No matter how bad the decision appears, I accept it.

Sure, a certain amount of fatalism is necessary in sports, and probably in much of life, but saying something is opinion doesn't mean it should be entirely subjective. Opinions need to be based on some sort of metric, or we are dealing with caprice instead of opinion.

If one fighter knocks another down with strikes and has more significant strikes in a round, it is a solid opinion that this is better than a round in which there is little action, but one fighter lands a short combo or a takedown at the end to seal the round. And yet both are scored the same by the rather silly MMA judging system. Words like dominance are what we use know, and they are simply too broad to yield good results.

A better definition for 10-8 round would be a round where one fighter won by a solid, but not dominant margin, but within that round hurt his opponent substantially at some point, either knocking him down, or visibly rocking him.

 

[MarleyLynx]

Or we could have a different scoring system. I really don't feel like a 10 point must system is meant for 3-5 rounders.

 

[omawho402]

Sure, a certain amount of fatalism is necessary in sports, and probably in much of life, but saying something is opinion doesn't mean it should be entirely subjective. Opinions need to be based on some sort of metric, or we are dealing with caprice instead of opinion.

If one fighter knocks another down with strikes and has more significant strikes in a round, it is a solid opinion that this is better than a round in which there is little action, but one fighter lands a short combo or a takedown at the end to seal the round. And yet both are scored the same by the rather silly MMA judging system. Words like dominance are what we use know, and they are simply too broad to yield good results.

A better definition for 10-8 round would be a round where one fighter won by a solid, but not dominant margin, but within that round hurt his opponent substantially at some point, either knocking him down, or visibly rocking him.

You're not wrong. I guess I was just expressing my sentiment. I would like judging to get better, just not holding my breath. lol

 

[DestinedAussie]

From MMA junkie article:

According to the unified rules that D’Amato and other judges rely on, a 10-8 score “does not require a fighter to dominate their opponent for 5 minutes of a round.” A 10-8 score should be awarded if “one fighter has dominated the action of the round, had duration of the domination and also impacted their opponent with either effective strikes or effective grappling maneuvers that have diminished the abilities of their opponent.” A 10-8 score should be considered if “a fighter IMPACTS their opponent significantly in a round even though they do not dominate the action.”

This is really broad, think it leaves a lot to interpretation..

Doesn't judging in every sport suck though?

This is why judging is all over the place. This is clear as mud. It is up to individual interpretation. It is no wonder the judging is so f..ked up.

 

[markys00]

I can't believe what I'm seeing... Or maybe I can, it's sherdog afterall.

You guys want these terrible judges to give MORE 10-8s? Ah, yes, let's give these shit judges more leeway to get the get the scores even more wrong. This is exactly why the new judging system should have never been implemented.

 

[markys00]

The fact commentators bring it up so much now is pretty disappointing.

10-8s were always pretty obvious, as it usually was when one fighter got absolutely dominated. It's fucking ridiculous Paul Felder doesn't seem to know how to score a 10-8 well. More unjustified 10-8s seem to be given out now than ever.

They know what they're doing. They're priming us to get used to even worse scores