Does "Don't leave it to the judges" really mean "we're OK w/ bad judges to encourage finishes"?

brackis1

Banned
Banned
Joined
Mar 31, 2007
Messages
42,611
Reaction score
24,192
The more I think about this dogturd line that the most powerful men in the sport like to mutter (Dana White), the more it becomes clear that the line is actually a great thing for him because it's an excuse to say "you better finish this!" using the judges as the scapegoat. Whereas a league commissioner saying "I don't want decisions in my league!" would come off as extremely bias, since it isn't reasonable to always demand/expect finishes.
It would be like if in the NFL, the refs were known to blow field goal calls, and Roger Goodell the commissioner saying "well if you don't want bad field goal rulings you better score a touchdown!"

Do you agree?
 
Last edited:
I don’t understand what you’re trying to say...
 
I don't think there's much behind it than Dana's passive aggressive way of saying "tough luck for not getting the finish"
 
I think bad judging is a copout when Dana wants a certain fighter to get a rematch or has to talk to the press about someone on his shitlist after they win.

But to answer the question, no, they don't mean the same thing.
 
History has shown us the judges are paid off in the UFC.

UFc needs undefeated champs to sell tickets, so they will vote in favor of of the undefeated champ as long as they make it passed 5 rounds.

if tony goes 5 rounds with kabib and he won on paper the judges will no doubt give it to kabib just to keep him undefeated.

alot of money goes under the table you can tell
 
dana-white-shit-eatin-grin.jpg
 
History has shown us the judges are paid off in the UFC.

UFc needs undefeated champs to sell tickets, so they will vote in favor of of the undefeated champ as long as they make it passed 5 rounds.

if tony goes 5 rounds with kabib and he won on paper the judges will no doubt give it to kabib just to keep him undefeated.

alot of money goes under the table you can tell

Are you serious? How old are you? Every single theory you have is straight up crazy! Judges are appointed by the State Athletic Commission and have nothing to do with the UFC! If a Dana White paid off a judge to score a fight for the Champion he and the judge would be arrested by the FBI who is in control of Sports Bribery and they would get several years in prison for this! This is a serious accusation that you shouldn't be tossing around! If Dana were actually doing this he would be hurting the integrity of his sport and the UFC and the $4 billion it would be purchased for would be worth nothing! Did you watch the Demetrious Johnson vs Henry Cejudo fight? DJ definitely won that fight! He was on a record title run and the judges gave it to the challenger so your theory is shot down with this! The only way to not get jobbed by an incompetent ref is to finish your opponent and "leave it out of the judges hands"! It's that fucking simple!!!
 
The more I think about this dogturd line that the most powerful men in the sport like to mutter (Dana White), the more it becomes clear that the line is actually a great thing for him because it's an excuse to say "you better finish this!" using the judges as the scapegoat. Whereas a league commissioner saying "I don't want decisions in my league!" would come off as extremely bias, since it isn't reasonable to always demand/expect finishes.
It would be like if in the NFL, the refs were known to blow field goal calls, and Roger Goodell the commissioner saying "well if you don't want bad field goal rulings you better score a touchdown!"

Do you agree?
No. Not the same.

Judging in MMA is extremely subjective. Its largely opinion when things get close. I think of the phrase "don't leave it in the hands of the judges" a lot like the phrase "play stupid games win stupid prizes".

No one is excusing bad judges. But life is a lot easier if you just don't let them become a factor.
 
It means there are no rules and we are watching sports entertainment. Welcome to the era of stupid where only the most idiotic fans can't see how fucked up the UFC is.
 
Its kind of like locking your doors at night. People shouldnt have to lock their doors at night to be safe but its still a good precaution.
 
It means that unless you're a draw you have to most likely get a finish to win.

You can clearly win 3 and 1/2 rounds but still end up losing because the other guy is a draw. Then have everyone say "you should have finished" when you did everything but finish in those first 3 and a half rounds.
 
The more I think about this dogturd line that the most powerful men in the sport like to mutter (Dana White), the more it becomes clear that the line is actually a great thing for him because it's an excuse to say "you better finish this!" using the judges as the scapegoat. Whereas a league commissioner saying "I don't want decisions in my league!" would come off as extremely bias, since it isn't reasonable to always demand/expect finishes.
It would be like if in the NFL, the refs were known to blow field goal calls, and Roger Goodell the commissioner saying "well if you don't want bad field goal rulings you better score a touchdown!"

Do you agree?

You know how eye witnesses to crimes are always terrible and see all kinds of shit that never happened ? Judges are like that too and you never know what they will see

Dana isnt saying oh well you got screwed nor is he threatening fighters to finish fights. Hes merely pointing out that you never know how it will be judged and the only way to be sure of a victory is to finish a fight

I cant believe so many people as of late are bitching about the saying dont leave it in the hands of the judges as if it isnt totally obvious what that means . If you want to use football and goodell as an example it would be like if he said well if you want to make sure you win you better outscore the other team by alot so theres no way they can get back in the game
 
Finishes was what the UFC was built on. And i agree. Fuck these point fighters.
 
Its kind of like locking your doors at night. People shouldnt have to lock their doors at night to be safe but its still a good precaution.
It's kind of like the Mayor of a City saying "lock your doors at night because the police in this city are awful" actually.
 
it means people acknowledge that judges are terrible. it doesnt mean theyre okay with it.
 
UFc needs undefeated champs to sell tickets,
There are examples of the contrary.
* Weidman vs Silva 2 sold more than Silva's previous fights
* Was GSP's PPV numbers hurt by him losing to Serra?
* Mighty Mouse never being a big seller
* Conor being stripped and losing to Nate - still went on to sell more and break PPV records in the rematch
* New champs often instantly become more popular than old champs. I think most people would agree it seems Izzy arguably already as popular or more than Whittaker, and Woodley wouldn't have been a huge seller if he continued his reign

I'd argue that in many cases the champ losing and getting a rematch generates a lot more hype and sales than someone remaining the dominant champ for too long
 
Last edited:
Judges can suck, don't take that chance......
 
Finishes was what the UFC was built on. And i agree. Fuck these point fighters.
Many would argue the most important fight in UFC history was a decision, funny enough: Bonnar vs. Griffin
 
It means we know judges suck but there isn't much we can do about it in the immediate future so it's best to finish the fight
 

Forum statistics

Threads
1,234,249
Messages
55,267,634
Members
174,713
Latest member
F5CHAMPIONSHIP
Back
Top