Highdea regarding MMA judging

Discussion in 'UFC Discussion' started by starballer, Jan 17, 2015.

  1. starballer

    starballer Supergod Ultrapope

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2014
    Messages:
    35
    Likes Received:
    3
    Location:
    Harriman, Tennessee
    I just had a thought about judging in MMA and decided to post it here and not check if anyone else has suggested it already.

    I had this idea after watching the Randy Couture vs. Brandon Vera fight a few moments ago.

    What if, like, each category that the fight is scored on is given its own, individual 10-point must system?

    Striking, Grappling, Aggression, and Octagon Control.

    Each category counts for up to 10 points out of the 40 maximum for each round.

    If Brandon Vera outstrikes Couture in round one, he gets a 10-9 for Striking for Round 1. If Couture keeps Vera pinned against the cage the entire time, but Vera showed some offense here, like in round 3, give Couture a 10-9 for Grappling in Round 1, putting them at 19-19 for the round. If one could say that Vera was the aggressor since he went for the finish the entire time when not being wall stalled, you'd do him 10-9 for that, putting Vera up 29-28. Then for Octagon Control, Randy would win here definitively, putting him at 10-8 for that and winning him the round 39-36, giving him the round 10-9. If he had won the round by a margin of, say, 40-35 and below (two 10-8 categories or four 10-9's) they would be given the round 10-8.

    However, had Vera, say, attempted more submissions in the round, and had won the grappling, like in the round where he full mounted Couture, resulting in less cage control, he could feasibly give himself the round's Grappling and given Randy a 10-9 for cage control, making the fight a draw, or a 10-10.

    If each round was scored that way, it would take the guesswork of how much a judge weighs each category in his own mind, by putting it in the same terms they are the most familiar with: a whole bunch of 10-9's.

    I can even picture most MMA judges doing something a little like this, only shorthand and in their head to figure out who won the fight. Why not make it an official process?

    Edit: I do not at all see this being too much for a judge to handle during a fight. When comparing strictly one category of judging at a time, the choices become much simpler than an overall score. For example, Brandon Vera clearly won the striking in round one, 10-9, while Randy won the cage control 10-9 and the grappling 10-9.

    A few extra, but much easier, decisions should take less time and thought than choosing a winner of a close round without weighing things out like that.

    ____________________________________________________

    On another note... to add to the versatility of this kind of judging (there are four categories, so a draw is more than feasible with the Striker gaining the Aggression 10-9 but losing out on grappling and cage control).... why not eliminate Aggression?

    Aggression is a very vague concept; either person could be winning the fight in terms of aggression, but not actually be winning the fight at all. This being a judging category would be biased against counter-punching, which is often more effective than being aggressive.

    Further, it's vague enough that the Aggression point would go to Vera in some rounds that he was absolutely dominated in terms of being wall stalled.

    Removal of this as a judging criteria would result in the guy who dives for takedowns the entire fight but does nothing with the position doesn't win the aggression point, and therefore can't outweigh solid striking using three different categories.

    Lastly, it makes it to where, if a judge is using a good formula for deciding the round outcome, there are an uneven number of categories, which has its obvious benefits.

    If the fight was judged solely on Striking, Grappling, and Octagon Control, you could see a fight won by a guy who dominates in striking but gets taken down ineffectively still win rounds, and grapplers who go for submissions from the bottom constantly while the person atop them is simply trying to escape their guard.


    I don't know, it doesn't seem like much to me upon second reading, but I figure I will leave it up to discuss.
     
    Last edited: Jan 18, 2015
  2. FountOfWisdom

    FountOfWisdom Banned Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2014
    Messages:
    1,271
    Likes Received:
    32
    Highdea sums it up perfectly. Bravo TS.
     
  3. joeyjoejoe

    joeyjoejoe Silver Belt

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2009
    Messages:
    12,278
    Likes Received:
    25,582
    Judges can barely keep up as it is.
     
  4. JayElectra

    JayElectra Paper Belt Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2010
    Messages:
    33,383
    Likes Received:
    2,189
  5. starballer

    starballer Supergod Ultrapope

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2014
    Messages:
    35
    Likes Received:
    3
    Location:
    Harriman, Tennessee
    They get an entire minute between rounds to make four much smaller decisions.

    I make more decisions than that per minute playing Trivia Crack.
     
  6. Mcgoat666

    Mcgoat666 White Belt

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2014
    Messages:
    76
    Likes Received:
    2
    Great on paper horrible in action.
     
  7. xP

    xP Silver Belt

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2010
    Messages:
    10,807
    Likes Received:
    7,059
    Doesn't sound like a good idea. Sometimes the striking or grappling exchanges that happen in a round are irrelevant and shouldn't be weighted the same as something that could have been much more important. You may have touched on that but that was a lot of text so I didn't read it all.
     
  8. Magx951

    Magx951 Banned Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2013
    Messages:
    5,328
    Likes Received:
    9,497
    Location:
    Canada
    This is actually, legitimately one of the worst ideas I've ever seen.
     
  9. starballer

    starballer Supergod Ultrapope

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2014
    Messages:
    35
    Likes Received:
    3
    Location:
    Harriman, Tennessee
    If they're ineffective, they still win Striking (or Grappling, whichever was ineffective) but they lose the Octagon Control point and thus lose the round.
     
  10. prikoke

    prikoke Brown Belt

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2008
    Messages:
    4,574
    Likes Received:
    1,017
    It's already been argued that if A wins one round very decisively, and B wins two by a hair, then A should win the fight (given how rare 10-8 rounds are). Adding extra categories would only amplify this problem.
    Imagine a backpedaling striker outboxing his opponent for an entire round. Yet, he lost in aggressiveness, possibly octagon control, and if his opponent managed a flash takedown also in grappling. That's 37-39.
     
  11. milliniar

    milliniar Who needs a belt?

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2010
    Messages:
    24,283
    Likes Received:
    14,888
    Location:
    Wade Wilson's Hometown
    bad idea, but aggression and octagon control should only be 5 pts each.
     
  12. EndlessCritic

    EndlessCritic Gold Belt

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2013
    Messages:
    22,560
    Likes Received:
    18,017
    the problem isn't the scoring criteria, it's the judges.
     
  13. obroin

    obroin Orange Belt

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2014
    Messages:
    370
    Likes Received:
    1
    Not a horrible idea in theory, but extremely hard to implement in practice. Too much for judges to decide. I've always like a 20 point must/half points for more difference in the dominance of a round.

    Slightly off topic, but I also don't think defending takedowns, or defensive moves in general, should win you a round. If you're actively fighting for a takedown, to the point that your opponent must focus on defending the takedown instead of responding with strikes or subs, then you are winning. Once they start fishing for subs or striking back (TB elbows ect) then you aren't on the offense and you are do longer dominant.
     
  14. bad seed

    bad seed Double Yellow Card Double Yellow Card

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2012
    Messages:
    19,812
    Likes Received:
    29,589
    you expect D-level cans like Cecil Peoples to follow all that?
     
  15. MRT

    MRT Black Belt

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2006
    Messages:
    6,502
    Likes Received:
    6,810
    this.

    it would be one thing to suggest a more complex scoring system if the commission judges were competent with the relatively simple one they (try to) follow now.

    asking these clowns to arrive at their scores by breaking it down into grappling, striking, etc. would result in a complete shit-show, IMHO.
     
  16. riitzni

    riitzni Silver Belt

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2011
    Messages:
    11,227
    Likes Received:
    7,014
    Location:
    Toluca Prison, hanging with the convicts and carvi
    Stick to the sticky icky, bud.
     
  17. accolyte1022

    accolyte1022 S.T.A.L.K.E.R Belt

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2006
    Messages:
    25,818
    Likes Received:
    38,863
    Location:
    Chernobyl Exclusion Zone
    Being generous today?
     
  18. starballer

    starballer Supergod Ultrapope

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2014
    Messages:
    35
    Likes Received:
    3
    Location:
    Harriman, Tennessee
    The bottom half of my post would remove aggression, so situations like that are less likely.
     
  19. JOdrummerSH

    JOdrummerSH Polyrhythmic Preposter

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2007
    Messages:
    2,645
    Likes Received:
    8
    Location:
    Oakland, CA
    He looks like the walking dead now when he's reffing. Not spry that peoples.
     
  20. Gambledub

    Gambledub Brown Belt

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2013
    Messages:
    3,970
    Likes Received:
    573
    Location:
    chopping gifs
    imo part of being a judge in combat sports should involve doing a short report as to why you scored the fight you did. At least that way you can either see where there coming from, or realize they're just horribly incompetent. At the very least it proves they actually watched the fight.

    For example if you disagree with the scoring of a certain fight on Sherdog you can hit the poster up and see why they felt "fighter x" won, you might not agree but at least you can respect the reasoning. With judges it's legitimately baffling sometimes as to how they come to their decisions, at least you could see why.

    Even better, they should allow mainstream mma media to "peer review" the reports with a good, neutral or bad rating and judges consistently getting good ratings could be given more fights and more higher profile fights (and get paid more) while judges consistently rated bad should be forced to undergo training and/or be investigated.
     

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.