If we compare Kutateladze and Tsarukyan based on stats vs Gamrot

[Unheralded Truth]

Round 1
Gamrot: 15 of 32 sig strikes lands, 46% of every attempt. 1 of 4 TD's attempted lands, control time 1:01.
Kutateladze: 11 of 20 sig strikes lands, 55% of every attempt. 0 TD's attempted.

Round 2
Gamrot: 16 of 45 sig strikes lands, 35% of every attempt. 1 of 4 TD's attempted lands, control time 0:56.
Kutateladze: 15 of 37 sig strikes lands, 40% of every attempt, 1 knockdown scored. 0 TD's attempted.

Round 3
Gamrot: 21 of 49 sig strikes lands, 42% of every attempt. 3 of 7 TD's attempted lands, control time 1:37.
Kutateladze: 11 of 29 sig strikes lands, 37% of every attempt. 0 of 1 TD's attempted lands, control time 0:01.

Lethaby valued volume + a landed TD more than accuracy, TD defense and control of space in round 1.
The other two judges didn't and favored Guram there, and later they all agreed on who won the remaining rounds.

VS.

Round 1
Gamrot: 10 of 19 sig strikes lands, 52% of every attempt. 0 of 4 TD's attempted lands, control time 0:24.
Tsarukyan: 15 of 37 sig strikes lands, 40% of every attempt. 1 of 3 TD's attempted lands, control time 0:46.

Round 2
Gamrot: 18 of 38 sig strikes lands, 47% of every attempt. 0 of 1 TD's attempted lands, control time 0:10.
Tsarukyan: 19 of 64 sig strikes lands, 29% of every attempt. 0 of 2 TD's attempted lands.

Round 3
Gamrot: 20 of 33 sig strikes lands, 60% of every attempt. 2 of 6 TD's attempted lands, control time 1:20.
Tsarukyan: 22 of 45 sig strikes lands, 48% of every attempt. 0 of 3 TD's attempted lands.

Round 4
Gamrot: 13 of 23 sig strikes lands, 52% of every attempt. 2 of 5 TD's attempted lands, control time 1:41.
Tsarukyan: 16 of 47 sig strikes lands, 34% of every attempt, 1 knockdown scored. 0 TD's attempted, control time 0:24.

Round 5
Gamrot: 20 of 25 sig strikes lands, 80% of every attempt. 2 of 5 TD's attempted lands, control time 1:23.
Tsarukyan: 23 of 54 sig strikes lands, 42% of every attempt. 0 of 1 TD's attempted lands, control time 0:29.

The judges all agreed on how to score every single round.
Round 2 was close in the striking department, but Gamrot the more accurate fighter. His TD defense didn't help him, as the judges favored Tsarukyan anyway.
Round 3 overall a really close one, Tsarukyan got the edge in landed strikes. Clearly lost the wrestling battle.
Round 4 Tsarukyan was the busier guy and scored a knockdown. The judges favored accuracy and control time of 1:41 from Gamrot here though.

 

[JustOnce]

There's no consistency with MMA judging, other than that they are consistently bad.

I leaned more towards Arman but the fight was really close. I did think Gamrot should have won the Guram fight though.

 

[JustOnce]

It's kinda criminal how depending on the judges, your win/loss would change in a lot of the fights..I mean....

 

[Enigma87]

Prob should be 22-0

Pretty impressive

 

[Iroh]

You can't really say what the judges favored, as you don't really know how they saw the fight. You can't assume they saw it the same way as the stats or your analysis. From their point of view they may have thought shots that missed actually hit or vice versa, or maybe thought a sub attempt was closer than it was.

 

[Ralph Wiggum]

It's kinda criminal how depending on the judges, your win/loss would change in a lot of the fights..I mean....

It really isn't. Close fights are close fights. Don't leave it in the judges hands is like the oldest sayings in the UFC.

 

[Only Here for Attachments]

Don't leave it in the hands of the judges

 

[Benoitthegr8]

Welcome to the 10 Point Rust System, okay for boxing, but antiquated for MMA, there are so many different actions that can/should/shouldn’t be scored compared to boxing that the judges struggle to keep correct score and there zero consistency. It’s almost as if the only things they recognize are significant actions, which is fine for a one sided fight. Unfortunately the closely contested fights often see competitors fucked because the judging fails to recognize what’s actually occurring and fails to score correctly.

 

[Mr Fahrenheit]

There's no consistency with MMA judging, other than that they are consistently bad.

I leaned more towards Arman but the fight was really close. I did think Gamrot should have won the Guram fight though.

It doesn’t help that the announcers seemingly haven’t read the scoring criteria. How many times do I need to hear someone say that a late round takedown is “huge”? It isn’t huge.

I think Arman has an argument to win all five rounds personally, although I probably would have scored it 48-47 or 49-46. Very very close though and I’m not shocked the judges watching live might go the other way.

It's kinda criminal how depending on the judges, your win/loss would change in a lot of the fights..I mean....

I think the remedy is just to book the fighters based on the performance rather than on the decision. Both guys last night showed that they’re ready to graduate into the top ten.

Only issue is that how available the top guys are going to be for that kind of fight. Islam and Dariush are looking up while Poirier and Chandler appear to be in big fight mode. The winner of RDA and Fiziev will want something big. Unclear what Gaethje is thinking.

In a perfect world we’d get something like Gamrot vs Gaethje and Arman vs Chandler but that seems unlikely.

I think the loser of RDA-Fiziev makes sense for Arman and either the winner, Dariush or Gaethje makes sense for Gamrot. Totally reasonable to give Dariush a title shot if he wins that fight.

 

[JustOnce]

It doesn’t help that the announcers seemingly haven’t read the scoring criteria. How many times do I need to hear someone say that a late round takedown is “huge”? It isn’t huge.

I think Arman has an argument to win all five rounds personally, although I probably would have scored it 48-47 or 49-46. Very very close though and I’m not shocked the judges watching live might go the other way.



I think the remedy is just to book the fighters based on the performance rather than on the decision. Book guys last night showed that they’re ready to graduate into the top ten.

Only issue is that how available the top guys are going to be for that kind of fight. Islam and Dariush are looking up while Poirier and Chandler appear to be in big fight mode. The winner of RDA and Fiziev will want something big. Unclear what Gaethje is thinking.

In a perfect world we’d get something like Gamrot vs Gaethje and Arman vs Chandler but that seems unlikely.

I think the loser of RDA-Fiziev makes sense for Arman and either the winner, Dariush or Gaethje makes sense for Gamrot. Totally reasonable to give Dariush a title shot if he wins that fight.

Well tbf to them, that has been the case for most of MMA history, and they just fucking around with rules to a point.

And i mean that sounds nice, but at the end of the day, win matters the most, I think. Win is a win. Sadly.

 

[Celeron]

It's kinda criminal how depending on the judges, your win/loss would change in a lot of the fights..I mean....

Also kind of criminal that judges are discouraged from awarding 10-10 rounds like it not ever possible for two fighters to be evenly matched.

 

[Mr Fahrenheit]

Well tbf to them, that has been the case for most of MMA history, and they just fucking around with rules to a point.

And i mean that sounds nice, but at the end of the day, win matters the most, I think. Win is a win. Sadly.

It costs them the win bonus, that’s probably the biggest deal for most of them. I don’t think in this case Arman has grounds to complain too much. I thought he won live. When I rewatched a couple of the closest rounds I thought the same but it was closer. Not sure either guy would have had the right to feel aggrieved.

 

[Mr Fahrenheit]

Also kind of criminal that judges are discouraged from awarding 10-10 rounds like it not ever possible for two fighters to be evenly matched.

I agree but I think they don’t want draws.

 

[Celeron]

I agree but I think they don’t want draws.

Then that’s even more criminal and makes absolutely no sense. So not only are they intentionally affecting the result of a fight, they are also affecting fighter careers and their potential income.

 

[JustOnce]

It costs them the win bonus, that’s probably the biggest deal for most of them. I don’t think in this case Arman has grounds to complain too much. I thought he won live. When I rewatched a couple of the closest rounds I thought the same but it was closer. Not sure either guy would have had the right to feel aggrieved.

could've gone either way

more criminal is people getting cut due to robberies. three fight contract for example, 1-2 is MASSIVELY different from 2-1.

But win bonus is huugee too

 

[JustOnce]

Also kind of criminal that judges are discouraged from awarding 10-10 rounds like it not ever possible for two fighters to be evenly matched.

as long as they get it right...

 

[Mr Fahrenheit]

Then that’s even more criminal and makes absolutely no sense. So not only are they intentionally affecting the result of a fight, they are also affecting fighter careers and their potential income.

I don’t think it makes as much of a difference as you do. If Moraes vs Aldo had been a draw, where would both guys be today? I’d argue in the exact same place. What about Sandhagen-Dillashaw? I’d argue the same. When guys perform well they get opportunities. Wins and losses matter but not that much IMHO. More importantly, very close fights will always be controversial. Adding in some 10-10 rounds isn’t going to satisfy you, you’ll still be ranting and raving that they wrongly and criminally gave a 10-10 and robbed so-and-so of his future.

 

[Celeron]

I don’t think it makes as much of a difference as you do. If Moraes vs Aldo had been a draw, where would both guys be today? I’d argue in the exact same place. What about Sandhagen-Dillashaw? I’d argue the same. When guys perform well they get opportunities. Wins and losses matter but not that much IMHO. More importantly, very close fights will always be controversial. Adding in some 10-10 rounds isn’t going to satisfy you, you’ll still be ranting and raving that they wrongly and criminally gave a 10-10 and robbed so-and-so of his future.

It’s more about the principal with me, the results should be as accurate and fair as possible. It make no sense that now a fighter has to carry a loss on their record even tho fight was really a draw, just because the judge had to flip a coin and choose a winner. That takes away from the integrity of the sport in my opinion.

Regarding the examples you gave, I agree, a draw wouldn't have made of difference in those fighters careers. But for up and comers the truth is that losses do have an impact much more since the fights and opportunities they get is based much on their records since they aren’t well known yet. Being on the wrong side of a couple of decisions early on in your career will def have negative effects, the journey alone to top 20 or top will be significantly lengthened by a couple of losses, esp if you fight in a tough division like LW.

 

[Tweak896]

Both fights were very closer and I could see a judge leaning either way in these fights. Atleast in my head I take these decisions with a grain of salt, the fights told us they were pretty much equal level.