Two thoughts on draws

[Sticko]

1) If you draw a championship fight they should cut the belt in half and declare co-champions
You're the contender, you just got in the cage with the champion and equaled his performance, that deserves a souvenir. An immediate rematch should happen but what if one guy is hurt and needs a longer layoff? Let each guy defend his piece of the belt and then unify the belts.

2) Should majority draws exist though?
The logic is one judge picked a winner, but they got outvoted by the two judges that picked a draw. That's how it is in boxing.
The counterargument would be this: the two judges who picked a draw should cancel each other out and the third judge tips the scale for the fighter he/she thought won.

Like in this case about half the media thought Moreno-Figueiredo was a draw and the other half thought Figgy won. Almost nobody has Moreno winning outright. That suggests Figgy was closer to winning.

The point deduction is a separate issue, because that's the referee and not the judges. In this case all Moreno had to do was win 2 rounds to get a draw, and a lot of people gave him 2 rounds. But of people that didn't, more people had him losing 4 rounds than had him winning 3.

If we got rid of majority draws we'd still have unanimous draws and split draws.

 

[TheRassler]

what happens when you bet on Figuieredo ML and the fight ends in a majority draw??

anyone know?

 

[Mohawk Banditó]

Nah, it's fair that you don't get the belt if you didn't win it, but of course you should get a shot again as soon as you're able. I think it's just ridiculous that people call it a successful defense and don't asterisk it as just a retention. If two champions fight and draw, they're both recognized with successful defenses? That seems silly.

Of course majority draws should exist. The point of 3 judges is a checks and balance system so that the majority of people come to the better decision, not the totality. By that logic, if one fighter gets 48-47, 48-47, but loses the third card 49-46, then he should lose, cuz of the 15 scored rounds, he lost 8 of them, so he was closer to losing.

 

[Megatronlee]

I like draws

 

[xn7]

should be a immediate rematch.

 

[Sticko]

what happens when you bet on Figuieredo ML and the fight ends in a majority draw??

anyone know?

it's either a push and they cancel the bet or you lose the bet. But I don't do sports betting so I don't know. In soccer where draws happen all the time I think you would just lose the bet.

 

[Mohawk Banditó]

I found an old post of mine:

Blue Blue Blue - Unanimous Decision: because they unanimously agreed on a winner.
Blue Blue Draw - Majority Decision: because the majority agreed there was a winner
Blue Blue Red - Split Decision: because they were split on who the winner was.
Blue Draw Red - Split Draw: because they were split and couldn't agree on a winner.
Blue Draw Draw - Majority Draw: because the majority agreed there wasn't a winner.
Draw Draw Draw - Unanimous Draw: because they unanimously agreed there wasn't a winner.

It's a simple system

Majority rules.

 

[Jose Beehive]

I rate draws and think they should be more frequent, as i've harped on about on here for a long time now... I suppose it would be kind of fair to give Moreno the Interim? or not, dunno bout that not thought about it..

In terms of Majority Draws, I am still in favour of them.

 

[Jose Beehive]

I found an old post of mine:


Majority rules.

Very nice! It's obvious in my head, but great to see it presented like that.

 

[Mohawk Banditó]

Very nice! It's obvious in my head, but great to see it presented like that.

Otherwise it's:

"And your winner. By minority decision!.."

 

[gonads20]

I think there needs to be more draws

 

[Sticko]

Nah, it's fair that you don't get the belt if you didn't win it, but of course you should get a shot again as soon as you're able. I think it's just ridiculous that people call it a successful defense and don't asterisk it as just a retention. If two champions fight and draw, they're both recognized with successful defenses? That seems silly.

Well like you said, a title fight that ends in a draw is not a defense, just a retention.
IDK, by the same logic, I don't think it's fair that the champ keeps the (entire) belt if he didn't win it.

Of course majority draws should exist. The point of 3 judges is a checks and balance system so that the majority of people come to the better decision, not the totality. By that logic, if one fighter gets 48-47, 48-47, but loses the third card 49-46, then he should lose, cuz of the 15 scored rounds, he lost 8 of them, so he was closer to losing.

That's looking at a different level of granularity though (scored rounds). I'm simply saying, if the number of judges who thought you won is more than the number of judges who thought the other guy won, maybe you should win?

 

[Mohawk Banditó]

I'm simply saying, if the number of judges who thought you won is more than the number of judges who thought the other guy won, maybe you should win?

But it IS that way. The problem is, a draw is ALSO a legitimate ending to a fight. So of the 3 legitimate endings, you, him or draw, more people thought it was a draw than you winning.

I think there needs to be more draws

too true. And 10-10 rounds in general.

 

[Sticko]

I found an old post of mine:

Mohawk Banditó said: ↑
Blue Blue Blue - Unanimous Decision: because they unanimously agreed on a winner.
Blue Blue Draw - Majority Decision: because the majority agreed there was a winner
Blue Blue Red - Split Decision: because they were split on who the winner was.
Blue Draw Red - Split Draw: because they were split and couldn't agree on a winner.
Blue Draw Draw - Majority Draw: because the majority agreed there wasn't a winner.
Draw Draw Draw - Unanimous Draw: because they unanimously agreed there wasn't a winner.

It's a simple system
Majority rules.

I understand the system, I'm just saying that's not the only way you could look at it.

 

[Clippy]

They should fight a sixth round sudden death

 

[Sticko]

But it IS that way. The problem is, a draw is ALSO a legitimate ending to a fight. So of the 3 legitimate endings, you, him or draw, more people thought it was a draw than you winning.


too true. And 10-10 rounds in general.

I'm not necessarily anti-draw and I think judges should be more willing to award 10-10 rounds. Unfortunately the current rules really discourage it.

 

[Sticko]

The paradox is that judging the scorecards as a whole, it's a majority draw. But if you were to instead judge round by round it's a completely different story:
a majority of judges had Figueiredo winning rounds 1, 2, and 5, drawing round 3, and losing round 4. (Rounds 1, 3, and 4 were unanimous.) That would amount to a 48-46, the same score that the minority judge (Derek Cleary) awarded.

Maybe the current system which incorporates majority draws helps prevent rigging by one extremely biased judge?
On the other hand, if it weren't for Junichiro Kamijo inexplicably giving Moreno the fifth round Figgy would have a majority decision win.

Which of the three judges had the most reasonable scorecard?

 

[DS7]

The paradox is that judging the scorecards as a whole, it's a majority draw. But if you were to instead judge round by round it's a completely different story:
a majority of judges had Figueiredo winning rounds 1, 2, and 5, drawing round 3, and losing round 4. (Rounds 1, 3, and 4 were unanimous.) That would amount to a 48-46, the same score that the minority judge (Derek Cleary) awarded.

Maybe the current system which incorporates majority draws helps prevent rigging by one extremely biased judge?
On the other hand, if it weren't for Junichiro Kamijo inexplicably giving Moreno the fifth round Figgy would have a majority decision win.

Which of the three judges had the most reasonable scorecard?

Kamijo should never judge a fight ever again. Giving Moreno the 5th round is just ridiculous.

 

[Oldman1]

They should stop scoring a 5 minute round as one round. Split it in two for scoring purposes. Seems obvious to me.

 

[Volador]

1) If you draw a championship fight they should cut the belt in half and declare co-champions
You're the contender, you just got in the cage with the champion and equaled his performance, that deserves a souvenir. An immediate rematch should happen but what if one guy is hurt and needs a longer layoff? Let each guy defend his piece of the belt and then unify the belts.

2) Should majority draws exist though?
The logic is one judge picked a winner, but they got outvoted by the two judges that picked a draw. That's how it is in boxing.
The counterargument would be this: the two judges who picked a draw should cancel each other out and the third judge tips the scale for the fighter he/she thought won.

Like in this case about half the media thought Moreno-Figueiredo was a draw and the other half thought Figgy won. Almost nobody has Moreno winning outright. That suggests Figgy was closer to winning.

The point deduction is a separate issue, because that's the referee and not the judges. In this case all Moreno had to do was win 2 rounds to get a draw, and a lot of people gave him 2 rounds. But of people that didn't, more people had him losing 4 rounds than had him winning 3.

If we got rid of majority draws we'd still have unanimous draws and split draws.

Yes, just like when King Solomon offered to divide the child between the two mothers to find out who truly felt motherly love, Dana should come in the cage and offer to cut the belt in half with a saber. Whichever fighter is willing to give up being champion to save the integrity of the belt, is the true champion in people’s hearts and the righteous belt holder.

If both are ok with splitting the belt, neither of them deserves it and the belt should be vacant until the next fight.