Why do judges always pick sides these days ?

I'd be in favour of 10-10s if there were more 10-8s.

Another good point. Judges need to hand out a 10-8 when appropriate, but instead they tend to hand out 10-9 rounds even when one guy dominates the round. The problem is that one guy can beat the other guys ass for an entire round and be given a 10-9, and then the next round, he could lose that round just barely, and a 10-9 is given to the other guy. At this point in the fight, it's a round a piece and is considered an "even" fight, even though the one guy had a much more dominate round and is actually winning the fight.

But if they just gave the dominant fighter a 10-8 round, now you've got one guy who is ahead on the scorecards, rightfully so...and the fight isn't called "even."
 
Picking a side is fine, it's just that "fuck it, I'll go with that guy by the width of a hair" counts as much as "that beatdown wasn't quite severe enough to be a 10-8".

MMA judging needs more granularity, both for judging and penalties.

Start awarding rounds all the way down to 10-6, start giving out 10-9.5/8.5s, or just a completely new system. I don't give a fuck, just give them more options when scoring.

I think penalties need to be more strictly applied. A significant groin shot will affect the fighters ability to continue, could be done deliberately to get a break if a fighter is getting tired. Eye pokes are ridiculous in many cases. A fighter who has never poked the eye of an opponent gets the same Grace as Jon Jones does each time he fights. If I were a ref I would tell Jones pre fight that the first time he extends his fingers towards his opponents eyes he gets a warning, second time even if he doesn't poke the eye he loses a point. He uses the Threat of an eye poke to change how his opponents approach the fight. Intent is something to consider but if a fighter continually throws a technique that can and does result in a foul then their previous fights need to be accounted for and they must be penalized.
 
I like the way this conversation is heading.

- We need a score system better suited for MMA
- Judges may need to issue draws more often
- Judge should issue 10-8 (and often 10-7) much more often (IMO)
- Intentional low-blows (case in mind: Jones) should get a point deduction upfront.

I'm gonna go ahead and proposed something for discussion: If a whole round is spent one fighter blanketing the other, like Phil Davis, Fitch or Maia vs. Fitch, what should they be scored? 10-9 or 10-8?
 
I think penalties need to be more strictly applied. A significant groin shot will affect the fighters ability to continue, could be done deliberately to get a break if a fighter is getting tired. Eye pokes are ridiculous in many cases. A fighter who has never poked the eye of an opponent gets the same Grace as Jon Jones does each time he fights. If I were a ref I would tell Jones pre fight that the first time he extends his fingers towards his opponents eyes he gets a warning, second time even if he doesn't poke the eye he loses a point. He uses the Threat of an eye poke to change how his opponents approach the fight. Intent is something to consider but if a fighter continually throws a technique that can and does result in a foul then their previous fights need to be accounted for and they must be penalized.

I'm in full agreement. And if a single point means a little less, it makes it easier for refs to take one. If a fighter can win a round by up to four points (or four increments of 0.5 or whatever), refs could take a point for low-level "benefit of the doubt" type fouls and not be afraid fucking up the fight completely.

I'd be ok with stricter enforcement no matter what scoring system they use, though. Both eyepokes and the "it's a free country" finger phalanx got to stop. No matter if it's Jones or Gustafsson or whoever who does it.
 
I would much rather see a draw than watch someone get absolutely robbed of a decision they clearly won. I know this is an extreme example but I was totally fine with Hunt VS Bigfoot being scored a majority draw. Fight was sick.
 
I like the way this conversation is heading.

- We need a score system better suited for MMA
- Judges may need to issue draws more often
- Judge should issue 10-8 (and often 10-7) much more often (IMO)
- Intentional low-blows (case in mind: Jones) should get a point deduction upfront.

I'm gonna go ahead and proposed something for discussion: If a whole round is spent one fighter blanketing the other, like Phil Davis, Fitch or Maia vs. Fitch, what should they be scored? 10-9 or 10-8?

Exactly
 
I agree, there are alot of fights I would have called draws, but they prefer to have a winner. They should have a bonus round or something, but nobody will want to see that for the prelim fighters. Tricky situation, it's hard to please everyone, so they prob won't change this anytime soon.
 
well draws always leave a bad taste. Like nothing really happens, nobody really won, so honestly i think a draw is worse than giving someone the edge in a close fight.

So "giving" a win to somebody that didn't earn it is worse than an honest accounting of the fight?

The problem with the "give it to somebody" attitude in close rounds is that is EXACTLY how point-shaving is done in boxing and MMA--the whole "taking a dive" way of fixing fights is hollywood, bribing judges to favor one fighter in close rounds is how it's done in real life.
 
there just needs to be more 10-8s imo. too many fighters get credit for straight up surviving a round.
 
I think it was GSP who said it best, it's like fighting 3 or 5 little fights. Each round is it's own take kind of thing. You lose the one round, you get a chance to win the next round
 
I like the way this conversation is heading.

- We need a score system better suited for MMA
- Judges may need to issue draws more often
- Judge should issue 10-8 (and often 10-7) much more often (IMO)
- Intentional low-blows (case in mind: Jones) should get a point deduction upfront.

I'm gonna go ahead and proposed something for discussion: If a whole round is spent one fighter blanketing the other, like Phil Davis, Fitch or Maia vs. Fitch, what should they be scored? 10-9 or 10-8?

agree with most of this except issuing a 10-7. i was thinking of posting that till i realised that said fighter would be down agruably 3 rounds in either a 3 round or 5 round fight.

the blanket thing should be a 10-8 but probably with the recognition of quicker stand ups for stalling. if the fight keeps getting stood up & said fighter ends back up on his ass, then its his fault.
 
agree with most of this except issuing a 10-7. i was thinking of posting that till i realised that said fighter would be down agruably 3 rounds in either a 3 round or 5 round fight.

the blanket thing should be a 10-8 but probably with the recognition of quicker stand ups for stalling. if the fight keeps getting stood up & said fighter ends back up on his ass, then its his fault.
If they would issue 10-7 at about the same frequency they're giving 10-8's now, would you think it's unfair?

Just for good measure: RDA vs. Pettis ended up in 50/45, so regardless of what rounds could have gone 10-8, no rounds in that fight would have been scored 10-7.

Aldo vs. Hominick was another good example, although it would not change the outcome of the fight, Aldo would have won even more points, still Hominick could have made a 10-7.
 
Back
Top