And this is what’s wrong with MMA judging

[Zmurri]

Whitaker nearly got finished in the 3rd and 5th. And how was the 5th not a 10-8? Even with round by round scoring, the elements of octagon control and significance of strikes (don’t waste my time with fightmetric bullshit) favored Yoel. At the very least, that was a draw.

As a long time boxing fan, I used to hate the judges who I perceived as corrupt. But MMA judges seem to be uneducated overall and that is worse. I tend to agree that you’ve got to beat the man to be the man, meaning the win has to be emphatic, but there were parts where I was thinking Whitaker’s corner should stop the fight. The belt would remain Whitaker’s and he would be spared needless injury. If that wasn’t an emphatic whooping, what is?

 

[Zmurri]

As a side note, this is also what’s wrong with MMA cornering. Beatings like the ones Whitaker just took shave years off a fighter’s prime and contribute greatly to the degradation of a truly fine chin. And for what? The belt would be his regardless. A smart corner with an eye towards the future of an already injury-prone fighter would have ended the fight in the fifth and taken the criticism, knowing that a healthy Whitaker against the rest of the division is near unstoppable. (And don’t waste my time saying that, technically, corners can’t throw the towel in MMA. The ref would heed the corner’s towel regardless of a technicality.)

Whitaker is a bit of a tard too. Heart is important, but head should rule. He should have opted out of this win that comes at terrible cost and does not advance his career.

 

[Zmurri]

And before anyone suggests true champs don’t opt out of needless damage, see GSP/Serra I. GSP tapped even before the ref waved Serra off. He was always a smart one.

 

[Zmurri]

Criteria for a 10-8 under the new MMA rules:

“A score of 10-8 does not require a fighter to dominate their opponent for 5 minutes of a round. The score of 10-8 is utilized by the judge when the judge sees verifiable actions on the part of either fighter. Judges shall ALWAYS give a score of 10-8 when the judge has established that 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.”

https://www.bloodyelbow.com/2017/1/...g-criteria-explained-hinds-bell-mma-interview

Can anyone explain how round 5 was not a 10-8?

 

[kenchilada]

Criteria for a 10-8 under the new MMA rules:

“A score of 10-8 does not require a fighter to dominate their opponent for 5 minutes of a round. The score of 10-8 is utilized by the judge when the judge sees verifiable actions on the part of either fighter. Judges shall ALWAYS give a score of 10-8 when the judge has established that 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.”

https://www.bloodyelbow.com/2017/1/...g-criteria-explained-hinds-bell-mma-interview

Can anyone explain how round 5 was not a 10-8?

Based on that criteria could you not make the same argument for r1 Whit . Action and duration.

 

[Zmurri]

Based on that criteria could you not make the same argument for r1 Whit . Action and duration.

No, read the rest of the criteria. There is a difference between a fighter choosing to be inactive versus a fighter being so badly dominated and thrashed that he is hanging on for dear life and utterly neutralized. Did you really think Romero was so impacted by Whitaker that he was hanging on for dear life in the first round?

 

[kenchilada]

No, read the rest of the criteria. There is a difference between a fighter choosing to be inactive versus a fighter being so badly dominated and thrashed that he is hanging on for dear life and utterly neutralized. Did you really think Romero was so impacted by Whitaker that he was hanging on for dear life in the first round?

No the rules say if 2 of the 3 criteria are met a 10-8 round should be given .

 

[RJK]

Well you don't seem to need us, you got this thread handled OP. Sorry to interrupt your monologue.

 

[Zmurri]

Well you don't seem to need us, you got this thread handled OP. Sorry to interrupt your monologue.

Thanks! I trust you can show yourself out of the thread.

 

[JJSBUR]

Whitaker nearly got finished in the 3rd and 5th. And how was the 5th not a 10-8? Even with round by round scoring, the elements of octagon control and significance of strikes (don’t waste my time with fightmetric bullshit) favored Yoel. At the very least, that was a draw.

As a long time boxing fan, I used to hate the judges who I perceived as corrupt. But MMA judges seem to be uneducated overall and that is worse. I tend to agree that you’ve got to beat the man to be the man, meaning the win has to be emphatic, but there were parts where I was thinking Whitaker’s corner should stop the fight. The belt would remain Whitaker’s and he would be spared needless injury. If that wasn’t an emphatic whooping, what is?

The 5th round I think would be questionable 10-8. Yoel did have some trouble and was on the canvas part of it.

 

[Cojopi Extomino]

Whittaker won 50-42 and used great octagon control in the 5th.

 

[Zmurri]

The 5th round I think would be questionable 10-8. Yoel did have some trouble and was on the canvas part of it.

Except a fighter does not need to dominate the whole round to earn a 10-8.

 

[JJSBUR]

Except a fighter does not need to dominate the whole round to earn a 10-8.

That still does not answer the question. The amount of dominance needed increases if the opponent has any success in the round. There is a fine line and I don't think it is obvious if it was achieved or not.

 

[Zmurri]

That still does not answer the question. The amount of dominance needed increases if the opponent has any success in the round. There is a fine line and I don't think it is obvious if it was achieved or not.

1. Your understanding is outdated and based on the old rules.

2. So, you think nearly getting finished multiple times in a round and hanging on don’t qualify for a 10-8. What does a 10-8 look like to you?

 

[JJSBUR]

1. Your understanding is outdated and based on the old rules.

2. So, you think nearly getting finished multiple times in a round and hanging on don’t qualify for a 10-8. What does a 10-8 look like to you?

Nah, Romero won the round for sure but it is debatable I think if it was 10-8. Romero was on the canvas so the amount of dominance has to increase a huge amount for 10-8. If it was enough is questionable.

As a former wrestler I was hoping for Romero to dominate. I think the right could be reasonable called either way.

 

[kenchilada]

1. Your understanding is outdated and based on the old rules.

2. So, you think nearly getting finished multiple times in a round and hanging on don’t qualify for a 10-8. What does a 10-8 look like to you?

2. khabib round against barboza or a Maia round against Gunnar .

 

[Paolo Delutis]

Based on that criteria could you not make the same argument for r1 Whit . Action and duration.

Thank you..lord jesus..there are some smart people on here after all

You cant give romero rounds 3 and 5 as 10 -8s and ignore the beatings of round 1 and 2 where romero was doing tai chi and getting his eye closed worse then koscheck did agaisnt gsp..

 

[kenchilada]

No, read the rest of the criteria. There is a difference between a fighter choosing to be inactive versus a fighter being so badly dominated and thrashed that he is hanging on for dear life and utterly neutralized. Did you really think Romero was so impacted by Whitaker that he was hanging on for dear life in the first round?

The rules you posted say nothing about inactive fighters. Refs can penalize for inactive fighters but can judges do the same. I honestly don't know the answer to that one.

 

[PEDS Help me Post]

Based on that criteria could you not make the same argument for r1 Whit . Action and duration.

You're conveniently skipping the "also impacted their opponent with either effective strikes or effective grappling maneuvers that have diminished the abilities of their opponent" part.

 

[Apollo33]

Criteria for a 10-8 under the new MMA rules:

“A score of 10-8 does not require a fighter to dominate their opponent for 5 minutes of a round. The score of 10-8 is utilized by the judge when the judge sees verifiable actions on the part of either fighter. Judges shall ALWAYS give a score of 10-8 when the judge has established that 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.”

https://www.bloodyelbow.com/2017/1/...g-criteria-explained-hinds-bell-mma-interview

Can anyone explain how round 5 was not a 10-8?

because that's actually vague as hell, Whittaker dominated the 1st and diminished Romero by busting his eye shut. is that a 10-8? Romero didn't do a thing in round 1