Joe Rogan on MMA judges: "They should have more than three judges."

Since wins and losses are irrelevant anyways (outside of the guaranteed win bonus) they need to take it all the way and simply crowd-source decisions.

That sounds good in theory, but just one example that comes to mine, With that system I wouldn't be surprised if Gus would've beat Jones. I wouldn't have agreed with that decision. They could act on emotion.
 
Yes, lets add MORE incompetent people who don't understand the criteria, let alone the positions and movements to this equation so we can get more terrible results. Truly riveting.

thats not what he said
"if you could have 5 experts"



did u even listen before posting lmao
 
Definitely. 9 judges should score the fight from a bench that is not live at the event, with no commentary or crowd noise to influence anything. They should be appointed for life and should not be removable for cause.

Judges listen to commentary?

It might be interesting to have an even number of judges.

You want to see a bunch of draws?
 
I don't think it's the number of judges, it's just that the judges that we currently have are shit

That's not it. Since judges were first appointed to score matches in combat sports people have complained that judges have sucked. Judges have been judging combat sports for nearly 100 years. The complaints about judges today are no different than the complaints about judges in the 1930's. The reality is, sometimes judges get it wrong and nothing will ever change that. Another reality is that even when judges get it right, there will always be some contingent of fans that think they got it wrong. Yet another reality is that some fights really just are very very very close, but big fans of one or the other fighter don't see it that way. They see it as their fighter just won by a clear landslide.

So I don't imagine there is much changing to judges that can fix "the problem."

That being said, someone mentioned something early in the thread that I do agree with. Judges should be watching from a live feed on mute without the persuasion of the fans or commentators. People will still hate their decisions, but that is technically the least biased way they can possibly make judgments.
 
ITT: sherdoggers who don't know anything about statistics
 
All we really need is Dana White giving a thumbs up or down after every fight.
 
Judges listen to commentary?



You want to see a bunch of draws?

At least one of the judges is sitting no more than three feet away from the commentators table. Sometimes even fighters mention having heard something the commentator said about them while they were actually fighting. So yes, at least some of the judges hear the commentators.
 
I have a question for anybody who can answer it.

Since AC appoint the judges, are they/some former boxing judges or judges from another sport?
 
More idiots is not the answer.
Less idiots is the answer.

Keep 3 judges who are a little more observant and not idiots.
 
Slightly off topic, imagine if Cecil Peoples and Kim Winslow "Got it on."

Cecil-Peoples_referee.gif


25heu86.gif


+

kimavatar.jpg


kim.jpg


Edit: While researching the internet for these fine images, I found someone else is trying to woo Winslow with a Twitter account named "Mr. Kim Winslow." As a side note, why do all MMA refs look like they are carnies? And here's another pic of Winslow dolled up for your pleasure.

8b4055936f17432b91078180e238133f.jpg
 
That sounds good in theory, but just one example that comes to mine, With that system I wouldn't be surprised if Gus would've beat Jones. I wouldn't have agreed with that decision. They could act on emotion.

But.....who cares? Clearly the UFC is okay with him in that spot, clearly the UFC put tons of money into marketing him as a top draw and at the time he was the hot ticket. His card placement and company position didn't change with any win or loss anyways, who cares if some fans think he "didn't really win"?
 
But.....who cares? Clearly the UFC is okay with him in that spot, clearly the UFC put tons of money into marketing him as a top draw and at the time he was the hot ticket. His card placement and company position didn't change with any win or loss anyways, who cares if some fans think he "didn't really win"?

But he didn't really win. If you would've asked me at the time I wouldn't said Gus. After rewatch* it clearly should've been jones. I think a lot of fans would've had that same perspective. Plus a lot of the fans were drunk and high when the watched it.
 
Twitter should decide.
 
The judges need better training, and need to be dedicated MMA judges, preferably with actual MMA experience. Putting them in another room would probably also help.
 
an online score would be dumb. Fans will have tremendous bias.
I like just before that they invent technologies in a pot haze.
 
The 10 point must system is the problem - judging the fight as a whole makes more sense to me.
 
i've been saying this for years. a larger sample size always leads to a more accurate result which is why mma and boxing need more judges. i'd say 5 is a good number
 
Back
Top