Scoring the fight as a whole (PRIDE, DREAM etc) vs Round by Round (UFC, Bellator etc)

[youngsteinel]

Pride had more controversial decisions than the UFC.

 

[Mooner]

Pride had more controversial decisions than the UFC.

Holistic judging had less controversial decisions than round-by-round unified judging.

 

[djacobox372]

oops

 

[EliteLurker]

I loved watching Pride, but I hate how it's become popular today to place its scoring on a pedestal that it in no way deserves.

Scoring the fight "as a whole" is a big problem, because it has zero transparency. There is no "score", just a winner and a loser. The judges just pick who they want at the end, and everyone else is just left to speculate as to how they reached that conclusion.

While this type of flexibility could potentially allow the "right" person to win, in situations where rigid round scoring would not, rarely would this actually be the case. Pride still had plenty of controversial decisions, and given the revelations about Yakuza influence, you have to wonder how many of those decisions had more to do with who they were told to pick, than who rightfully deserved to win.

Even in cases where Pride judges were acting in good faith, it's just human nature to place greater emphasis on the very end of the fight than what happened in the beginning. This way of scoring puts a bias on how a judge felt at the very end, and devalues what happened in the beginning. Heck, even the commentators on Pride often stated that the way you ended the fight was the way to earn a judges' decision, which of course was NOT part of the official rules and contradicted the way it was supposed to be scored.

This, 100% this. When you score a fight as a whole the end counts more than the start, which is bullshit of course. Not to mention there's no transparency in the criteria when the fight is scored like that.

The fix I think that would help the most is to really lessen control as a scoring criteria. Takedowns should score because they are offense, something happened and the other guy couldn't stop it. But once on the ground it should be judged off of offensive out put. Laying on top of someone and landing no strikes shouldn't count for anything. Same with clinching on the fence, only the strikes landed should count, not the act of holding a guy there.

 

[Magnum1978]

Pride had more controversial decisions than the UFC.

On what basis do you draw that conclusion, or did you just pull that out your rear end?

Which fights/decisions are you talking about? Where are all these decisions in Pride that were contraversial, enough of them to be "more" than what we have been experiencing even in UFC/Strikeforce/Bellator, percentage wise? Sure, there were a few strange calls I know of, but nothing compared to what we see now. And no fighters attempting things to 'pander' to the system.

Nearly every UFC event we have contriversial decision or strange score rendered.


Did you just make a blanket statement for the sake of it?

 

[Vashgun]

On what basis do you draw that conclusion, or did you just pull that out your rear end?

Which fights/decisions are you talking about? Where are all these decisions in Pride that were contraversial, enough of them to be "more" than what we have been experiencing even in UFC/Strikeforce/Bellator, percentage wise? Sure, there were a few strange calls I know of, but nothing compared to what we see now. And no fighters attempting things to 'pander' to the system.

Nearly every UFC event we have contriversial decision or strange score rendered.


Did you just make a blanket statement for the sake of it?

I would say a majority of those suspect decisions can be blamed almost entirely on two things. One being Japanese nationalism and the other betting lines. Neither of which reflects on the actual judging system

 

[accolyte1022]

]I understand the reasoning for scoring rounds to avoid corruption and have more accountability for a decision but I like judging by the fight as a whole.
[/COLOR]
I think a better way of keeping rounds is making 10-8 and 10-7 used more often in order to give certain rounds more significance. I think it would help a lot with fights like Sonnen-Bisping where some rounds were way stronger than others. However, the problem with that is it makes it easier for ties. I think to fix that, you can just give the judge the option overriding the total round score with their choice on who won the fight entirely.

Yeah, good luck getting rid of rounds, this is the most realistic change. (I know 'doggers hate the r word). ACs will NEVER go the fight as a whole route. I still think open scoring MIGHT help. How many times has a fighters corner convinced him he won a round, only to lose the round in the decision?

 

[Kneeuinthenutz]

Pride had more controversial decisions than the UFC.

It really has nothing to do with the big picture.

Pride is Pride...The controversy surrounding decisions had more to do with the corrupt nature of the organization and not the system they devised. Not to mention you don't have to use that one.

We're talking about a new judging system based on the fight as a whole, and establishing the best criteria possible. Pride's scoring criteria would be a good foundation to really build something awesome out of.

What's in place right now? It so embarrassing I can't even get into it without losing my cool, but it literally allows the fighter who clearly lost to win.

You can scrap by the first 2 round winning by the absolute thinnest of margins imaginable, get totally blasted out of the water in the final round and.........get this......You can still legitimately win the fight under these rules or a draw at the worst....

The incredible problem this creates should not have to be explained. It's horrifically bad and needs to be addressed.

It's how you end up with debacles like Shogun vs Machida 1.

 

[Mooner]

It really has nothing to do with the big picture.

Pride is Pride...The controversy surrounding decisions had more to do with the corrupt nature of the organization and not the system they devised. Not to mention you don't have to use that one.

We're talking about a new judging system based on the fight as a whole, and establishing the best criteria possible. Pride's scoring criteria would be a good foundation to really build something awesome out of.

What's in place right now? It so embarrassing I can't even get into it without losing my cool, but it literally allows the fighter who clearly lost to win.

You can scrap by the first 2 round winning by the absolute thinnest of margins imaginable, get totally blasted out of the water in the final round and.........get this......You can still legitimately win the fight under these rules or a draw at the worst....

The incredible problem this creates should not have to be explained. It's horrifically bad and needs to be addressed.

It's how you end up with debacles like Shogun vs Machida 1.

Truth.