Judges discussing decisions with one another?

[Da Speeit]

Would you be for it?
Instead of judges sitting separately, why not have them at a single table with one monitor where they can discuss the round with one another and be forced to a conclusion on who won the round? Treat each round as if it were a fight; if Judge 1 and 2 believe fighter A won, the majority ruling would give him that round, as opposed to each tallying their own scorecard and adding it at the end; it would be a single scorecard agreed upon by 3 judges.

What say you?

 

[kammfreudenstei]

That would definitely be a different dynamic, if they could do it in timely fashion. I feel like they would announce /display who won the round to the crowd

 

[Metallicalabran]

that way the judge with better dialectic skills chose always the winner ? WTF

the most separated judges the better, and the most far away they are from each other the better.

Perfect scenario ??? 10 judges (the more, the better), from 10 different countries at kilometers of distance.

WORST POSSIBLE SCENARIO ? YOUR IDEA.

 

[Great Angus]

I'm not sure. If you had a really good debater he could sway the other two judges into thinking how he does. What we need is consistent judging and accountability for egregious decisions

 

[KhabibTheBeagle]

No way. Each judge needs to present their own individual score. They don't always get it right, but at least there was no chance of a biased judge swaying the opinions of the other two.

 

[Chramelated]

I'd prefer if Sherdoggers could judge the fights instead.

 

[Da Speeit]

so you guys are discouraged by the possibility that a judge who possibly knows more than the other two could convince the other two of a correct decision?

 

[dropshot001]

This would become a contest of who is the most convincing

 

[trblesome1]

There will never be a perfect way of judging, the more people you involve in the decision the more chance for bias or people who aren't good at judging

Going by stats alone would also be ridiculous because not every strike/takedown/grappling advance has the same impact on the fight

It seems like they could make sure the people who are doing it would be held accountable more than they are and at least that would make the ridiculous decisions less likely

 

[Chules]

I'd prefer if Sherdoggers could judge the fights instead.

This.

The 'Who do you think won' poll threads mostly always bring out the fighter who should've won

 

[Da Speeit]

I'd prefer if Sherdoggers could judge the fights instead.

I agree, and stoppages should all be twitter polls. Refs should be equipped with smartphones.

Shogun would bead.

 

[trblesome1]

This.

The 'Who do you think won' poll threads mostly always bring out the fighter who should've won

Yeah sure nobody votes for the guy they like more in those polls lol

 

[Bilal Bones]

I'd prefer if Sherdoggers could judge the fights instead.

Diaz bros, Shogun, Fedor and some other fighters would never lose a decision then. Any Jon Jones fight that goes to a decision would be lost by him.

 

[Chramelated]

I agree, and stoppages should all be twitter polls. Refs should be equipped with smartphones.

Shogun would bead.

Are you having a fucking giggle at my suggestion?

 

[MMA]

I don't see how it would improve anything. You don't event make an attempt to explain what it would improve about judging and more importantly how it would improve it.

 

[Da Speeit]

I don't see how it would improve anything. You don't event make an attempt to explain what and how it would improve about judging.

Well, because i want to discuss it, which is why i opened a discussion instead of saying "I AM RIGHT HEAR ME OUT"

What a strangely defensive post.

 

[accolyte1022]

This.

The 'Who do you think won' poll threads mostly always bring out the fighter who should've won

Undefeated BJ Penn and Shogun!

 

[BROKENSPROKET]

Would you be for it?
Instead of judges sitting separately, why not have them at a single table with one monitor where they can discuss the round with one another and be forced to a conclusion on who won the round? Treat each round as if it were a fight; if Judge 1 and 2 believe fighter A won, the majority ruling would give him that round, as opposed to each tallying their own scorecard and adding it at the end; it would be a single scorecard agreed upon by 3 judges.

What say you?

I got a better idea. Kenny Rice and Baas Rutten touched on it.

Every judge should be in a separate sound proof room. Each get 6 monitors to watch the fight from all angles. The also get audio feed from microphones in the ring, no commentators and crowd noise reduced. They score the fight based on what they see, independent of what other judges are doing.

 

[Metallicalabran]

so you guys are discouraged by the possibility that a judge who possibly knows more than the other two could convince the other two of a correct decision?

nope, we are discouraged by the possibility that a judge who possibly knows LESS than the other two could convince the other two of an INCORRECT decision.

Why do you think a judge who knows more of fighting is the better convincing judgest too?

THE MOST JUDGES

THE MORE UNRELATED

THE BEST

 

[LiLoMMA]

It's sad, but I don't think MMA will ever get this right. The phrase "don't leave it in the hands if the judges" is telling, this is not going to get fixed