Scoring a 5 round fight

[Do better]

Just a thought, if fighter A wins the first 3 rounds but loses the final 2 then in the current system fighter A wins. That system however takes away from the spirit of fighting but enforces a specific set of rules. Today people have argued Rogans comments about what would happen if there were more rounds in Reyes vs Jones, both he and Evans agreed that Jones would finish Reyes. I'm not confident that they are right, but that isn't the point.
What if, and only if, a fighter wins the final 2 rounds but lost the first 3 then the judges score the fight as a whole? If they did judge as a whole based on the fighters perceived ability to carry on then we could avoid having the winner of the first 3 being awarded, despite losing the rest of the fight.
I realize some will disagree, and some will but without totally redefining how a fight should be scored I think this could eliminate a few errors. Didn't pride judge as a whole?

Thoughts? Keep it classy please

 

[Zebra Cheeks]

Just a thought, if fighter A wins the first 3 rounds but loses the final 2 then in the current system fighter A wins. That system however takes away from the spirit of fighting but enforces a specific set of rules. Today people have argued Rogans comments about what would happen if there were more rounds in Reyes vs Jones, both he and Evans agreed that Jones would finish Reyes. I'm not confident that they are right, but that isn't the point.
What if, and only if, a fighter wins the final 2 rounds but lost the first 3 then the judges score the fight as a whole? If they did judge as a whole based on the fighters perceived ability to carry on then we could avoid having the winner of the first 3 being awarded, despite losing the rest of the fight.
I realize some will disagree, and some will but without totally redefining how a fight should be scored I think this could eliminate a few errors. Didn't pride judge as a whole?

Thoughts? Keep it classy please

Hey boss. Nice thread.

the major argument against this method of evaluating fights is that fighters might take long breaks or “rest” during the fight if there’s no repercussions. In the current system, you must have output through out the entire fight, as losing a single round can be detrimental to your ability to win.

 

[Do better]

Hey boss. Nice thread.

the major argument against this method of evaluating fights is that fighters might take long breaks or “rest” during the fight if there’s no repercussions. In the current system, you must have output through out the entire fight, as losing a single round can be detrimental to your ability to win.

Agreed, but intentionally taking the first three rounds off will fail more often than it works. At least I hope lol.

 

[Zebra Cheeks]

Agreed, but intentionally taking the first three rounds off will fail more often than it works. At least I hope lol.

Yeah...I don’t think it’s as much about that as it is keeping the “action” going. No one wants someone to turn it on for a round, rest, turn it on, rest...they want 25 minutes of entertainment.

 

[Do better]

Yeah...I don’t think it’s as much about that as it is keeping the “action” going. No one wants someone to turn it on for a round, rest, turn it on, rest...they want 25 minutes of entertainment.

True, it's shitty that integrity is lost on what is supposed to be a primal art.

 

[Zebra Cheeks]

True, it's shitty that integrity is lost on what is supposed to be a primal art.

I completely agree my friend. Back in pride it was simple right? Two men trying to take each other out. But the sports evolved since then. I don’t like the current system, but as many of the other posters here have said, I don’t know what we could genuinely do to improve it. But I’m glad we’re having conversations like this.