How do you think judges actually judge?

[elwani]

I mean we've all heard "effective aggression", "octagon control", etc. and that's all well and good in theory, but when rubber hits the road there's gotta be some more scientific system to keep track of action over five minutes to avoid all kinds of biases right?

Do you think judges are trying to keep a tally of significant strikes, time spent in the dominant position, etc.? If you were a judge, how would you do it?

 

[Askren’s chin]

Whoever has the better hairline gets the decision

 

[13Seconds]

I think it's individual from judge to judge but i guess they all try to base it on the criterias.

 

[xhaydenx]

I think it's individual from judge to judge but i guess they all try to base it on the criterias.

This is the answer, of course.

There are other things that definitely play into their decision making though that aren't part of any criteria.

Recency bias happens a lot. If one fight clearly wins the first half of a round, but then loses the 2nd half just as clearly as he won the first, then judges almost always seem to give the round to the person who won the later half.

I think a lot of this comes down to just how we are exposed to basic narrative structure all our lives. In movies or books, the climactic moments are not at the start. They can be, but they're not in what's generally considered a good story. They're at the end. We think in terms of beginnings, middles and ends. We want strong endings, and when we get one, it resonates more strongly with us as it's what we expect and are used to.

Body language is another huge factor in how judges are scoring fights. This happens a lot in WMMA, but I've seen fights where a girl has won most of the striking exchanges and had half a round of ground control, but then still lost that round. In all of those cases body language was huge. The other girl would be bouncing around more, would come out of exchanges and jump right back in with more urgency, etc. It seems like a dumb thing, but in fights where things are relatively even, that body language can easily sway judging.

 

[SpecialDelivery]

With there eyes you silly ass bastard

 

[elwani]

This is the answer, of course.

There are other things that definitely play into their decision making though that aren't part of any criteria.

Recency bias happens a lot. If one fight clearly wins the first half of a round, but then loses the 2nd half just as clearly as he won the first, then judges almost always seem to give the round to the person who won the later half.

I think a lot of this comes down to just how we are exposed to basic narrative structure all our lives. In movies or books, the climactic moments are not at the start. They can be, but they're not in what's generally considered a good story. They're at the end. We think in terms of beginnings, middles and ends. We want strong endings, and when we get one, it resonates more strongly with us as it's what we expect and are used to.

Body language is another huge factor in how judges are scoring fights. This happens a lot in WMMA, but I've seen fights where a girl has won most of the striking exchanges and had half a round of ground control, but then still lost that round. In all of those cases body language was huge. The other girl would be bouncing around more, would come out of exchanges and jump right back in with more urgency, etc. It seems like a dumb thing, but in fights where things are relatively even, that body language can easily sway judging.

But all the things you mentioned, don't they argue all the more for a more scientific criteria? I mean it can never be completely scientific, but right now it seems like a black box.

 

[The-AxeMurderer]

Most judges in MMA today

 

[Normot]

Gut feeling.

 

[Blayt7hh]

If one of them is the champ, they just nod off and assume they won

 

[xhaydenx]

But all the things you mentioned, don't they argue all the more for a more scientific criteria? I mean it can never be completely scientific, but right now it seems like a black box.

Yes, maybe it does argue for a more scientific criteria, but when you have humans and emotions as part of the judging, this is probably the best you can hope for.

 

[Nip Tickler]

 

[Iroh]

Sometimes they flip a coin, most of the times they probably cheat by looking at the paper of their fellow judges and copy the scores, sometimes they just make shit up, oh and they are often biased with big names like Jones.

 

[ExitLUPin]

 

[smiles mma]

more draw rounds instead of coin flip.
more 10-8, 7's for dominant.
judges being accountable, bring them to the post fight presser for the media to question.

 

[CrocopHKtotheballs]

I mean we've all heard "effective aggression", "octagon control", etc. and that's all well and good in theory, but when rubber hits the road there's gotta be some more scientific system to keep track of action over five minutes to avoid all kinds of biases right?

Do you think judges are trying to keep a tally of significant strikes, time spent in the dominant position, etc.? If you were a judge, how would you do it?

Joe rogan screaming OH after every landed strike.

 

[TemDee]

Feel like it mostly comes down to who won the last 90 seconds of the round. Seems like 5 minutes is too long for most judges to accurately assess.

 

[RemyR]

 

[Sticko]

This is the answer, of course.

There are other things that definitely play into their decision making though that aren't part of any criteria.

Recency bias happens a lot. If one fight clearly wins the first half of a round, but then loses the 2nd half just as clearly as he won the first, then judges almost always seem to give the round to the person who won the later half.

I think a lot of this comes down to just how we are exposed to basic narrative structure all our lives. In movies or books, the climactic moments are not at the start. They can be, but they're not in what's generally considered a good story. They're at the end. We think in terms of beginnings, middles and ends. We want strong endings, and when we get one, it resonates more strongly with us as it's what we expect and are used to.

Body language is another huge factor in how judges are scoring fights. This happens a lot in WMMA, but I've seen fights where a girl has won most of the striking exchanges and had half a round of ground control, but then still lost that round. In all of those cases body language was huge. The other girl would be bouncing around more, would come out of exchanges and jump right back in with more urgency, etc. It seems like a dumb thing, but in fights where things are relatively even, that body language can easily sway judging.

It's not that weird that body language matters, though, because that's how you tell who is hurt, who is tired, who is feeling confident, aggressive, etc.

 

[xhaydenx]

It's not that weird that body language matters, though, because that's how you tell who is hurt, who is tired, who is feeling confident, aggressive, etc.

Personally, it isn't weird to me at all. It can be a defining factor to a fight.

 

[horseshoe_pass man]

there are no judges dude. have you ever seen them? they dont exist. it's all just made up. some guy in the back flips a coin for the close fights