Unified scoring system

Fess

Green Belt
@Green
Joined
Feb 25, 2005
Messages
1,037
Reaction score
340
Hi Sherdoggers,
I'm not in a habit of starting threads, but the latest UFC event, the controversial decisions to be exact, made me ask myself a question:
Is there a system of how the judges score?
As far as I know, there is no precise point system of how they score whatever happen in the octagon. For example if a fighter punches in the face or the body, is it scores the same?
MMA isn't boxing and there are a lot of elements into it, and we all know that it is difficult to judge, but I think that if they will unify a system (I'm not talking about the global scoring of 10 must system - which is not that obvious as well), which will give each element as submission, takedown, knockdown, ground-control time various strikes a point system, the decisions will be much less controversial.

We live in 21st century, and it is possible to provide judges an application that will score the points, and all the judges will need is click on the right element. The judges won't even score it, as the app will, and that will prevent a bias judging.
We will definitely see less split and controversial decisions that way.
What do you think?
 
Last edited:
Seems to me MMA is too variable in nature for this to work. Like if you came up with a system (say, a head punch is 2 points, a takedown is 5 points, etc.), even if the judges could remember it and correctly apply it while they watch, you would run into situations where the system would tell you one guy won the round but common sense would tell you the other guy did.
 
They have guidelines they follow

also can’t have that type of scoring system with striking cause sometimes not all punches or kicks are created equal.

you gotta evaluate the impact of the strike n now damage is taken into consideration.
 
Nah it's too subjective of a sport to quantify.
The current system would work if there was some accountability and review of the judges scores. As it is the judges do a shit job and then we move on.

The scoring last event was fucked, but who will ask the judges to explain their reasoning? Where can we discuss lessons learned and pass those on to future judges. How do we ensure consistency across events?

It's not the criteria that is the problem, it's the system.

That and an unwillingness to score draws. Sometimes fights are close, it's a shame judges need to flip a coin and give a round to someone.
 
I think they should judge the fight as a whole. 5 minute rounds are too long to be counted the same way as 3 min boxing rounds.

Someone can slightly edge the first 2 rounds, only to get fucked up in the 3rd relatively badly, and still win. That shouldn't happen.

Even worse in championships, a la GSP vs Hendricks, GSP slightly edged 3 rounds(maybe), and got wrecked the other 2. He won.

Judges should only score round by round for context to who they think won the whole fight.

At the end the judge picks the person they think won the fight overall.
 
Seems to me MMA is too variable in nature for this to work. Like if you came up with a system (say, a head punch is 2 points, a takedown is 5 points, etc.), even if the judges could remember it and correctly apply it while they watch, you would run into situations where the system would tell you one guy won the round but common sense would tell you the other guy did.

even in that scenario the ref would have to signal every point scored that would be completely distracting n in that case judges wouldn’t be needed

or if judges keep their on scoring, they would still end up with different results cause they’re probably gonna miss few strikes.

another issue would be how to score the impact of the strike?

is a jab worth as much as a hook?

what about a jab that snaps the opponent head back n the one that doesn’t?

there would be too many variables for it to work
 
Seems to me MMA is too variable in nature for this to work. Like if you came up with a system (say, a head punch is 2 points, a takedown is 5 points, etc.), even if the judges could remember it and correctly apply it while they watch, you would run into situations where the system would tell you one guy won the round but common sense would tell you the other guy did.
Why the common sense will contradict? If the scoring system will be made wisely, and by that I mean that points will reflect the common sense (e.g. a strike to the face - 2 p, to leg/body - 1 p., knockdown - 5 p, takedown - 3 p.), even the common observer will score it more closely that it is scored right now, and the more educated ones will definitely score it unanimously.
Of coarse it won't be perfect as no one can notice all which happens in the octagon, but if every element has it's oint amount, the result will be very close, and most likely there will be much less split decisions.
 
even in that scenario the ref would have to signal every point scored that would be completely distracting n in that case judges wouldn’t be needed

or if judges keep their on scoring, they would still end up with different results cause they’re probably gonna miss few strikes.

another issue would be how to score the impact of the strike?

is a jab worth as much as a hook?

what about a jab that snaps the opponent head back n the one that doesn’t?

there would be too many variables for it to work
We live in 21st century and have the technology. It's not that hard to write an application with a friendly user interface, and the judges can use it (for example every element is on the screen and the judge needs only choose it), and the program will calculate the scoring for each judge.
it will prevent he biased judging, as judge will be busy with scoring and won't calculate it.

Regarding the impact - why is it matters. There needs to be a "hard" system. If the impact was significant enough - there will be a KD or KO. As I wrote - KD for example will give 3 points.
Regrading all other variants - all should be written in stone. A punch to the face (no matter which one) - 2 points (for example) but the can decide whatever, if a jab is less than a hook, that give it less points, but it's not matter. What matter that there will be a scoring system, and most likely there will be a lot less split and controversial decisions.
 
Hi Sherdoggers,
I'm not in a habit of starting threads, but the latest UFC event, the controversial decisions to be exact, made me ask myself a question:
Is there a system of how the judges score?
As far as I know, there is no precise point system of how they score whatever happen in the octagon. For example if a fighter punches in the face or the body, is it scores the same?
MMA isn't boxing and there are a lot of elements into it, and we all know that it is difficult to judge, but I think that if they will unify a system (I'm not talking about the global scoring of 10 must system - which is not that obvious as well), which will give each element as submission, takedown, knockdown, ground-control time various strikes a point system, the decisions will be much less controversial.
What do you think?
I don't that that would work. There's too many variables to make some sort of point system. I think we just need competent judges and more judges. Right now the judges don't seem to have any clue what they are looking at and there have been a few times Rogan noticed them not even watching. Something that would help is actually using 10-10 rounds which never happens but the main issue seems to be just bad judges. A lot of types if someone has a lot of hype and is suppose to win they given them the split decision nod.
 
Why the common sense will contradict? If the scoring system will be made wisely, and by that I mean that points will reflect the common sense (e.g. a strike to the face - 2 p, to leg/body - 1 p., knockdown - 5 p, takedown - 3 p.), even the common observer will score it more closely that it is scored right now, and the more educated ones will definitely score it unanimously.
Of coarse it won't be perfect as no one can notice all which happens in the octagon, but if every element has it's oint amount, the result will be very close, and most likely there will be much less split decisions.
you could probably design a system that would lead to less disagreement between judges, but i'm saying there are so many variables that you can't design a system that will correctly predict who *should* win the fight in every case.
like, say a takedown is 3 points. two guys shoot for takedowns. one opponent defends the takedown, but the other opponent is a BJJ expert who pulls guard. A very bad position for one guy is where the other one wants to be. Do you score it the same?
 
MMA has the new unified rules of mma.

The problem is they aren't adopted everywhere. And some places have very subjective scoring criteria. And even when the new unified rules are in place, the judges still suck because they dont know what they are looking at.
 
We live in 21st century and have the technology. It's not that hard to write an application with a friendly user interface, and the judges can use it (for example every element is on the screen and the judge needs only choose it), and the program will calculate the scoring for each judge.
it will prevent he biased judging, as judge will be busy with scoring and won't calculate it.

Regarding the impact - why is it matters. There needs to be a "hard" system. If the impact was significant enough - there will be a KD or KO. As I wrote - KD for example will give 3 points.
Regrading all other variants - all should be written in stone. A punch to the face (no matter which one) - 2 points (for example) but the can decide whatever, if a jab is less than a hook, that give it less points, but it's not matter. What matter that there will be a scoring system, and most likely there will be a lot less split and controversial decisions.
another example, if you decide all punches to the face are worth 2 points, that's problematic because not all punches are created equal. sometimes a punch barely lands but it opens up a big cut. other times a punch does no visible damage but badly stuns a guy.

you also have to think about the fact that UFC fighters all start out in amateur fights and then smaller promotions. presumably you want those fights to happen under the same rules so you can't make the judging/scoring system too complicated for local promotions to use
 
you could probably design a system that would lead to less disagreement between judges, but i'm saying there are so many variables that you can't design a system that will correctly predict who *should* win the fight in every case.
like, say a takedown is 3 points. two guys shoot for takedowns. one opponent defends the takedown, but the other opponent is a BJJ expert who pulls guard. A very bad position for one guy is where the other one wants to be. Do you score it the same?
Yes. I will score it the same. Why is it matters if the guy is a bjj guy, unless he tries a submission. A submission attempt will for example score 2 point, and a submission which leads almost to a tap for example 3. Or it can be 2 no matter what. The scoring isn't matter as long as there is one.
 
Yes. I will score it the same. Why is it matters if the guy is a bjj guy, unless he tries a submission. A submission attempt will for example score 2 point, and a submission which leads almost to a tap for example 3. Or it can be 2 no matter what. The scoring isn't matter as long as there is one.
No, because the scoring doesn't just have to be consistent, it also has to make sense. If you automatically gave points for a takedown, you're unfairly punishing the BJJ guy, who doesn't mind being taken down. Sometimes a takedown actually helps the guy on the bottom, sometimes it's totally irrelevant because the guy stands right back up, sometimes it really helps the top guy. How do you design a fair system that says how much a takedown is worth?
 
another example, if you decide all punches to the face are worth 2 points, that's problematic because not all punches are created equal. sometimes a punch barely lands but it opens up a big cut. other times a punch does no visible damage but badly stuns a guy.

you also have to think about the fact that UFC fighters all start out in amateur fights and then smaller promotions. presumably you want those fights to happen under the same rules so you can't make the judging/scoring system too complicated for local promotions to use
Why is it matters how the punch landed? If it's a KD - yes it's matters - give it 3 points, if the blood is matters to the judges - than you can score it accordingly. The amount of points is not matter, what matters is the system. if it will be the same - less debates and the most important is there will be less reasons to complain.

The 10 must system is utilized in US everywhere, and there are some places that has a little different rules, but I'm talking about the same thing as utilize it along with the 10 must system, not only the UFC - but the MMA.
 
So you’re suggesting they take their eyes off the fight to make sure they’re punching in the right metric into their ipads?

Do you see the flaw?
 
No, because the scoring doesn't just have to be consistent, it also has to make sense. If you automatically gave points for a takedown, you're unfairly punishing the BJJ guy, who doesn't mind being taken down. Sometimes a takedown actually helps the guy on the bottom, sometimes it's totally irrelevant because the guy stands right back up, sometimes it really helps the top guy. How do you design a fair system that says how much a takedown is worth?
Too bad it's the way it scored right now, and the judges score the takedown no matter if on the other end is BJJ guy or not. The problem is that we don't know how it scored.
 
We live in 21st century and have the technology. It's not that hard to write an application with a friendly user interface, and the judges can use it (for example every element is on the screen and the judge needs only choose it), and the program will calculate the scoring for each judge.
it will prevent he biased judging, as judge will be busy with scoring and won't calculate it.

Regarding the impact - why is it matters. There needs to be a "hard" system. If the impact was significant enough - there will be a KD or KO. As I wrote - KD for example will give 3 points.
Regrading all other variants - all should be written in stone. A punch to the face (no matter which one) - 2 points (for example) but the can decide whatever, if a jab is less than a hook, that give it less points, but it's not matter. What matter that there will be a scoring system, and most likely there will be a lot less split and controversial decisions.

Too many things to track for it to work.

It it’s only grappling, you could had some sort of scoring system, however when you add in striking it would become a mess.

You have to take into consideration different strikes n their effectiveness.

not all the strikes to the face are the same. Some do almost no damage, some do cosmetic damage, some can rock or stun an opponent...

it wouldn’t make sense to score them all the same.

also this would lead to another problem...

point fighting

it’s already an issue, but the way things are right now n guidelines in place

Being close to finishing a fight is worth more than just point fighting

if you had a point system in place, then fighters would no longer look to finish fights n just just try to “score points”
 
The reality is that MMA does not have an objective scoring system, and as long as that is the case, we need to accept the judges' opinions.

If a judge "feels" like one fighter is winning the fight, then it is what it is. Fighters need to go for the finish and not fight for points.

Judges are not counting every single strike. Sometimes, they don't even care about the impact of the strikes (as we saw between Angela vs Claudia). Judges are going by their opinions of who looks like the winner.
 
So you’re suggesting they take their eyes off the fight to make sure they’re punching in the right metric into their ipads?

Do you see the flaw?

Ok now....
Do you seriously think that they don't blink? I don't know what about you, but I did manage to watch a lection in the university and summarize it simultaneously, and most of the students did the same. If you place the ipad or whatever in front of you (not on the table), you can watch the fight and click the needed image/ especialy if you already know that place of it which takes something like half a second or max 1 second.

I don't know if you remember but a few events ago Joe and DC where complaining that the judges not even looking at the fights, so don't fool yourself that now when they use nothing for scoring, they don't blink.
 
Back
Top