They NEED to use more range in round scoring

MDEmike

Blue Belt
@Blue
Joined
Jun 29, 2007
Messages
732
Reaction score
0
This is just an example of how judging fights in MMA needs to change. There needs to be a straw that breaks the camel's back here... To me, round 2 should have been 10-8 Bisping. Round 3 should have been 10-7 Anderson. Rd 5 should have been 10-8 Anderson. They need to utilize more of the 1-10 scale so the margin of victory in a round can actually affect the outcome of the fight. No way can you think Rounds 1 and 4 should have been worth as much as the other rounds. Or, just judge the fight as a whole. And if that means that the last round is the most important, oh well. That makes sense. Usually who wins a fight is indicative who won the end, not the beginning.

But really, I am content with the decision. I don't think Anderson was robbed by any stretch. I do think however, under a more precise style of scoring, things could have gone differently. This would have changed a lot of "robberies" over the years. And even though this wasn't a robbery, it's yet another warning flag for what could potentially happen. I mean, at what point do they even give a 10-8? Sometimes it seems like they forget they exist... Endrant.
 
How the hell should 3 have been a 10-7 round? If that knee never happens bisping easily wins that round.
 
How the hell should 3 have been a 10-7 round? If that knee never happens bisping easily wins that round.
Maybe 10-8? It was more than just a knee and it almost finished him. I think that's pretty significant. I think the rest of the round was close.
 
Bisping was winning round 3 until that knee at the bell.
 
Perhaps I jumped the gun with rd 3. Was in the moment and didn't have the clearest breakdown.
 
Back
Top