- Joined
- Dec 24, 2010
- Messages
- 37,478
- Reaction score
- 11,154
You can't give specifics on those cause some jabs are harder than others same with the impact of takedowns. The scoring criteria is good, the judges just need to be trained on it better.It's fair, but the 10 point system needs remodelling as well.
When we don't really have any clarity on what weighting to give effective striking vs grappling (I.e - what is a takedown worth vs a jab?) then you're always going to get unique interpretations of it.
Scoring the fight as a whole and making the criteria exclusively who caused the most damage, followed by showed the most intent to win the fight, would hopefully eliminate a lot of the 'takedown to lay in someone's guard/lean against someone against the fence bullshit' if they know it won't get points.
Like this fight for example judges valued octagon control over effective striking/grappling which shouldn't happen and would be easy to fix with judges having to watch random fights and judges them and use the judging criteria to explain why they score rounds a certain way and if a judge keeps getting stuff wrong they need to be suspended.