Can a fight be overturned to due incompetent judging?

[elreece]

I mean, at one point they caught a judge looking away for the better part of a fight and wasn’t paying attention.

Serious? Is there a clip of this?

 

[fortheo]

We wont see it,but this judge basically shows that he does not even know how to judge correctly,and cannot be trusted to do his job.

Pretty sure that tweet is from a troll account, but regardless, that judge does need to be fired.

 

[MeatWagon06]

It's one of the worst decisions in a UFC title fight with only a few worse like Machida vs Shogun 1.

Yeah if Machida/Shogun 1 wasn’t overturned it’s not happening here. That wasn’t even debatable that Machida won.

 

[NoBiasJustMMA]

You do realize your stats kind of wreck your case right?

"Effective striking". Look at those numbers again and put them into respective connect percentages (punches landed compared to punches thrown) and a defensive effectiveness stat (strikes absorbed compared to strikes thrown).

These percentages are a huge but vastly over looked statistic in a fight, the Santos fight being a great example. Santos threw twice as many strikes while only landing at a 25% connect rate to Jon's 65%.

Reyes definitely has a better connect rate then that here but is still badly out stuck from a striking efficiency perspective.

Regardless though, this fight was close enough any outcome would have been reasonable and in my opinion winning the last rounds when you're tired, beat up and forced too dig down deep is much harder than winning early and is what makes a Champion a Champion so I don't really have a problem with this decision and it definitely doesn't qualify for being reversed or even reviewed by a commission.

No it doesn't. Connection percentage doesn't really matter in MMA, that's a boxing thing. In MMA if one fighter is landing more strikes and more significant strikes they have more effective striking.

 

[Break Brick]

You do realize your stats kind of wreck your case right?

"Effective striking". Look at those numbers again and put them into respective connect percentages (punches landed compared to punches thrown) and a defensive effectiveness stat (strikes absorbed compared to strikes thrown).

These percentages are a huge but vastly over looked statistic in a fight, the Santos fight being a great example. Santos threw twice as many strikes while only landing at a 25% connect rate to Jon's 65%.

Reyes definitely has a better connect rate then that here but is still badly out stuck from a striking efficiency perspective.

Regardless though, this fight was close enough any outcome would have been reasonable and in my opinion winning the last rounds when you're tired, beat up and forced too dig down deep is much harder than winning early and is what makes a Champion a Champion so I don't really have a problem with this decision and it definitely doesn't qualify for being reversed or even reviewed by a commission.

that's some pretty shakey logic.

If fighter A throw 150 punches and lands 140, and Fighter B throws 2 punches and lands two punches, does fighter B have more effective striking because their percentage was better?

 

[boss429]

No it doesn't. Connection percentage doesn't really matter in MMA, that's a boxing thing. In MMA if one fighter is landing more strikes and more significant strikes they have more effective striking.

Connect percentage and defensive percentage matter in any combat sport involving striking since it is the very definition of both offensive and defensive effectiveness. These are Boxing Judges for the most part after all.

 

[boss429]

that's some pretty shakey logic.

If fighter A throw 150 punches and lands 140, and Fighter B throws 2 punches and lands two punches, does fighter B have more effective striking because their percentage was better?

Obviously not, lol, and I'm sure you know that.

Percentages matter in rounds where over all numbers are close, which is also when Octagon control and effective aggression become important. Volume alone isn't the be all end all unless it's a significant undeniable advantage.

 

[Hanri]

Serious? Is there a clip of this?

There
https://clips.clippit.tv/qakwew/360.mp4

 

[Break Brick]

Obviously not, lol, and I'm sure you know that.

Percentages matter in rounds where over all numbers are close, which is also when Octagon control and effective aggression become important. Volume alone isn't the be all end all unless it's a significant undeniable advantage.

The only case I could see for bringing in percentages to the equation would be if the volume was exactly even, which it wasn't. Otherwise volume and effectiveness (which is a little to subjective to really drill down), although I would also give that to Reyes in all of the first 3 along with the volume.

 

[boss429]

The only case I could see for bringing in percentages to the equation would be if the volume was exactly even, which it wasn't. Otherwise volume and effectiveness (which is a little to subjective to really drill down), although I would also give that to Reyes in all of the first 3 along with the volume.

I would give Reyes the first 2 without a doubt. It's RD.3 that this fight came down too and while Reyes had a small volume edge Jones had a far better percentage both ways and controlled the pace and range of the round.

This is what the whole fight came down too since both won 2 clear RDS each and this RD can easily be scored either way based on your interpretation of the rules but if you go by the letter of the law for scoring it's clear the RD goes to Jon.

Great fight at the end of the day but anyone calling it an egregious robbery is just being absurd. Draw would have been ideal imo.

 

[DLX]

 

[Platon]

Its a fake account

 

[NoBiasJustMMA]

Connect percentage and defensive percentage matter in any combat sport involving striking since it is the very definition of both offensive and defensive effectiveness. These are Boxing Judges for the most part after all.

Connect percentage only matters if the strikes landed by each fighter are very close, they were not.

 

[Break Brick]

I would give Reyes the first 2 without a doubt. It's RD.3 that this fight came down too and while Reyes had a small volume edge Jones had a far better percentage both ways and controlled the pace and range of the round.

This is what the whole fight came down too since both won 2 clear RDS each and this RD can easily be scored either way based on your interpretation of the rules but if you go by the letter of the law for scoring it's clear the RD goes to Jon.

Great fight at the end of the day but anyone calling it an egregious robbery is just being absurd. Draw would have been ideal imo.

I mean, obviously you're entitled to your opinion and I'm unlikely to change your mind, but I just cant see scoring a round to someone who gets hit more times than the other guy when no grappling isn't a factor within a given round, even if the percentage is better. Things like pace a control are good and likely contributed to Jones winning 4 and 5 by tiring Reyes out, but imo they aren't enough to actually swing that specific round to be credited to Jones based on the current scoring criteria.

If one guy is punching you more than you are punching them, percentage is an afterthought, unless the damage/effectiveness disparity is huge. Same goes for control, because what are you really controlling, other than where in octagon your opponent is out punching you from?

But yeah, great fight. That's one thing we can agree on!

 

[boss429]

Connect percentage only matters if the strikes landed by each fighter are very close, they were not.

Depends on the RD.

RD.3, the RD this fight ultimately comes down too, they were extremely close with Jon having the better percentages as well as a clear advantage in "Octagon control".

Ultimately though percentages only matter after the fight when the numbers come out and show who was the more efficient striker and who was more efficient defensively, they don't really play a role in real time judging.

 

[boss429]

I mean, obviously you're entitled to your opinion and I'm unlikely to change your mind, but I just cant see scoring a round to someone who gets hit more times than the other guy when no grappling isn't a factor within a given round, even if the percentage is better. Things like pace a control are good and likely contributed to Jones winning 4 and 5 by tiring Reyes out, but imo they aren't enough to actually swing that specific round to be credited to Jones based on the current scoring criteria.

If one guy is punching you more than you are punching them, percentage is an afterthought, unless the damage/effectiveness disparity is huge. Same goes for control, because what are you really controlling, other than where in octagon your opponent is out punching you from?

But yeah, great fight. That's one thing we can agree on!

My response under this addresses the percentages pertaining to real time scoring, lol.

Well the Aldo Edgar 1 fight is a good example of #s alone not being the be all end all. That was a clear 4-1 Aldo but some people where calling it a robbery because Frankie had slightly higher volume in a couple RDS while being walked down by an Aldo controlling the cage.

The problem with that is in one if those RDS Frankie landed a bunch of knees to the thigh against the cage to gain that statistical edge but they had no effect while Aldo landed 5 or 6 less strikes but smashed his head in with all of his. Another RD was similar but Frankie raked up leg kicks for the edge while Aldo again punished him with head strikes though ultimately landed fewer by volume.

IMO that fight is the fight they should use to train Judges on how to score MMA fights since it was also a rare example of Judges doing there job perfectly. (Jones Santos is actually quite similar to this fight minus the flawless judging).

 

[Katsumi Yamada]

This judge clearly doesn't understand the judging criteria. Aggression and octagon control are the least important judging criteria and only matter when the striking is even which it was not in rounds 1, 2 and 3.

Round 1 Jones 17 of 27, with 1 of 5 head shots landed

Round 1 Reyes 23 of 59, with 7 of 33 head shots landed

Round 2 Jones 22 of 37, with 8 of 9 head shots landed

Round 2 Reyes 33 of 68, with 11 of 46 head shots landed

Round 3 Jones 19 of 34, with 7 of 18 head shots landed

Round 3 Reyes 26 of 45, with 7 of 25 head shots landed

http://ufcstats.com/fight-details/fae99a4089f8abb0

"Effective Striking/Grappling shall be considered the first priority of round assessments. Effective Aggressiveness is a ‘Plan B’ and should not be considered unless the judge does not see ANY advantage in the Effective Striking/Grappling realm. Cage/Ring Control (‘Plan C’) should only be needed when ALL other criteria are 100% even for both competitors. This will be an extremely rare occurrence."

http://www.abcboxing.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/juding_criteriascoring_rev0816.pdf

Yea this dolt of a judge exposed himself here. Should have kept his mouth shut.

 

[Break Brick]

Depends on the RD.

Ultimately though percentages only matter after the fight when the numbers come out and show who was the more efficient striker and who was more efficient defensively, they don't really play a role in real time judging.

Lo

My response under this addresses the percentages pertaining to real time scoring, lol.

Well the Aldo Edgar 1 fight is a good example of #s alone not being the be all end all. That was a clear 4-1 Aldo but some people where calling it a robbery because Frankie had slightly higher volume in a couple RDS while being walked down by an Aldo controlling the cage.

The problem with that is in one if those RDS Frankie landed a bunch of knees to the thigh against the cage to gain that statistical edge but they had no effect while Aldo landed 5 or 6 less strikes but smashed his head in with all of his. Another RD was similar but Frankie raked up leg kicks for the edge while Aldo again punished him with head strikes though ultimately landed fewer by volume.

IMO that fight is the fight they should use to train Judges on how to score MMA fights since it was also a rare example of Judges doing there job perfectly. (Jones Santos is actually quite similar to this fight minus the flawless judging).

Lol Well yeah, any judge that scored this fight 49-46, or 48-47 jones in my opinion is not likely to be whipping out the calculator to run the numbers on striking percentages. Which really begs the question of why even bring it up? It points to it be essentially being irrelevant unless the shots landed by the guy that throws less are clearly more damaging (like the Frankie Aldo example you're quoting). That's a case of the shots being more effective rather than more efficient (percentages) which is not really relevant to the Jones Reyes fight or round in question.

 

[elreece]

There
https://clips.clippit.tv/qakwew/360.mp4

O shit!

Thanks, yeh that guy should be banned from judging any future bouts.

 

[HHJ]

Yea this dolt of a judge exposed himself here. Should have kept his mouth shut.

The more i read it the more i think its a troll account. It sounds like JonesbonesPicogram69 wrote this