Is mma judging flawed, corrupt or incompetent?

[fzoid4454]

O i see you want the old old days.

No, not really. But for drugs that are in no way PEDs, a sports governing organization shouldn't be saying anything one way or the other about it.

 

[Southpoor97]

I watch every fight as well, but watching them and understanding how they're judged are two different things.

That live line is just a reflection of what bettors are doing to move lines and how the bookies see the fight. Live odds mean absolutely nothing. 90% of my income comes from gambling. If you're using live odds to determine who is winning then you are doing it completely wrong.

There is an argument for an Albazi win if you actually understand how the judges are scoring fights, especially ones like Lee and Sal. It's all visuals. I explain it more in the post above yours. I've had some big wins doing live bets and predicting these sorts of so called "robberies".

I was done betting for the day but there was no way in hell I would have touched Kai late as I thought there was a huge chance visuals were going to decide rounds 1 and 2.

I appreciate the patronising. But I reject your claims that you understand judging more than me and that there is a genuine argument for an Albazi win.

thanks for your input though

 

[xhaydenx]

I appreciate the patronising. But I reject your claims that you understand judging more than me and that there is a genuine argument for an Albazi win.

thanks for your input though

I wasn't being patronizing, and it's not a claim I know more about judging, it's literally a fact, evidenced by you not being able to identify how these dumb judges found a way to give Albazi the win. If you knew enough about judging you'd at least be able to understand why they scored it how they did. If you knew enough about judging you'd know that this sort of scoring coming from Sal and especially Chris Lee wouldn't be a surprise at all.

 

[Southpoor97]

I wasn't being patronizing, and it's not a claim I know more about judging, it's literally a fact, evidenced by you not being able to identify how these dumb judges found a way to give Albazi the win. If you knew enough about judging you'd at least be able to understand why they scored it how they did. If you knew enough about judging you'd know that this sort of scoring coming from Sal and especially Chris Lee wouldn't be a surprise at all.

Didn’t say it was surprising.
I understand the argument is Albazi 1,2,3. I just don’t agree that there is an argument for Albazi to win rd1.

92% on mma decisions disagree too.

So brush up on your knowledge and don’t try and be so contrarian, it doesn’t make you look knowledgeable.

so again, thanks for your uninformed input

 

[xhaydenx]

Didn’t say it was surprising.
I understand the argument is Albazi 1,2,3. I just don’t agree that there is an argument for Albazi to win rd1.

92% on mma decisions disagree too.

So brush up on your knowledge and don’t try and be so contrarian, it doesn’t make you look knowledgeable.

so again, thanks for your uninformed input

You don't get it lol. I don't even disagree with you, really. I scored R1 for Albazi live. I thought he pretty clearly won those rounds.

Whatever % of MMA decisions or whoever means absolutely nothing.

I'm not being contrarian. I explained in a post I mentioned earlier in the thread how visuals won that fight for that particular judge. If you knew so much about MMA judging like you claim, you'd know that Sal and Lee score fights pretty much only on visuals. You'd know that Chris Lee in particular has no clue what he's watching. There's plenty of other case studies for this.

Put yourself in Chris Lee's shoes: you're a dumbass who loves visuals. If a fighter is going forward this is good. If a fighter is backpedaling for the whole round, this is bad.

There's the argument for Albazi R1. Doesn't matter what you, me, or MMA Decisions think lol.

(note: I wasn't calling you a dumbass above, just so we're clear haha)

 

[HeffDoesWant]

Almost every round being scored 10-9 is the problem.

Lack of nuance, multipled over various rounds (scoring events) has caused more shitty results than any other factor.

In my very strongly held opinion.

You shouldn't have people frequently winning 2 rounds to 1, when a bystander would say they got beat.

 

[michi972]

Either judges are retarded or corrupted. Maybe both