Should decisions be draws?

MMAPlayground.com » MMA General » General MMA Talk » Should decisions be draws?
POLL: Should decions be draws?
Yes 23% (9)
No 62% (24)
Only split decisions 15% (6)
disorderlyvision
7/6/08 4:26:56PM
In the early Pride FC's if it went the distance it was an automatic decision there were no judges. I was wondering if any of you thought this would be a good idea. I havent made my mind up yet, but i am leaning towards it being a good idea. i think it has its advantages:
1) stops bad decisions (Hamill v Bisping)
2) prevents split decisions that could go either way. fights where either fighter could just as eaily have won. (ortiz v griffin, guida v t. griffin)
3) gets rid of the subjective aspect of the fight, you either finish, get finished, or draw. no judges subjective opinions.

kinda like what some people say about big nog, "he doesnt lose he just runs out of time"
to me a decision win is an unfullfilling win as you didnt really defeat your opponent you just outscored him for 2-3 rounds in the eyes of the judges which doesnt always mean a lot, but if you knock your opponent out or submit him you have definativly beat him. there is no doubt.

i understand not all decision victories are close. some are lopsided, but i feel that if you are beating them up that bad you should be able to find a way to finish them.
joshryanshepherd
7/6/08 4:33:58PM
i think this is a perfectly fine idea, i hate decisions! if someone wants to see them than go to boxing!
MFOTHER
7/6/08 4:35:37PM

Posted by disorderlyvision

In the early Pride FC's if it went the distance it was an automatic decision there were no judges. I was wondering if any of you thought this would be a good idea. I havent made my mind up yet, but i am leaning towards it being a good idea. i think it has its advantages:
1) stops bad decisions (Hamill v Bisping)
2) prevents split decisions that could go either way. fights where either fighter could just as eaily have won. (ortiz v griffin, guida v t. griffin)
3) gets rid of the subjective aspect of the fight, you either finish, get finished, or draw. no judges subjective opinions.

kinda like what some people say about big nog, "he doesnt lose he just runs out of time"
to me a decision win is an unfullfilling win as you didnt really defeat your opponent you just outscored him for 2-3 rounds in the eyes of the judges which doesnt always mean a lot, but if you knock your opponent out or submit him you have definativly beat him. there is no doubt.

i understand not all decision victories are close. some are lopsided, but i feel that if you are beating them up that bad you should be able to find a way to finish them.



no. even if your example hammill v bisping .............a draw would have also been a bad decision...it was a decisive victory......


i think if anything they should score it like dream...where the decision is based on the fight as a whole. the boxing point system just doesnt seem to work. has way too many wholes ie.... a good wrestler can win a decision based on takedowns, even if he is nearly submitted everytime he takes that person down
EON
7/6/08 4:44:03PM
only really close split decisions (which they never do unless its point deduction) unanimous needs to be unanimous...as in all 3 judges score it the same.
Darnok
7/6/08 4:48:33PM

Posted by joshryanshepherd

i think this is a perfectly fine idea, i hate decisions! if someone wants to see them than go to boxing!

Aaronno9
7/6/08 5:10:07PM
I think that it should be the case with split decisions. If judges, who should have an extended knowledge of the sport and look to score on the same things cant agree on a decision, then in my mind, somethings up.

No way UD's should be draws though. I mean, look at fights like quarry vs starnes. To call that fight a draw is criminal.Then theirs fights with guys who are just generally hard to put away, Kos vs Lytle being a good example. Kos stomped Lytle for like 90% of the fight, but its really hard for anybody to finish that guy so i think Josh deserved that win.
mrsmiley
7/6/08 5:55:02PM
For title fights I would say all decisions should be draws.If an opponent can't submit or KO the champion,I say he shouldn't get the title.(Fedor never would have been PRIDE FC champion!!!)

I really don't dislike decisions.It just seems like their's a lot of bad ones.
tepid55
7/6/08 6:08:48PM
Yes, but it should only aply to title fights where someone is already the champion.
disorderlyvision
7/6/08 6:40:27PM
wow, the votes are 50/50 so far. i figured id get flamed for bringing it up. i guess people are just getting tired of the bad decisions.
papercut
7/6/08 7:31:58PM

Posted by MFOTHER
i think if anything they should score it like dream...where the decision is based on the fight as a whole. the boxing point system just doesnt seem to work. has way too many wholes ie.... a good wrestler can win a decision based on takedowns, even if he is nearly submitted everytime he takes that person down




I never understood why just taking someone down and LnPing them would score more points than a person who gets taken down but works for submissions the entire time they're on the ground.

905010
7/6/08 8:15:59PM
I don't think that it is a horrible idea, but what if for instance there's a fight where one guy completley dominates, but can't finish the guy because he has a iron jaw. Or like someone said when Fedor beat Nog, it wasn't a close fight but Nog has a great chin so it would have been a draw.
disorderlyvision
7/6/08 8:37:34PM

Posted by 905010

I don't think that it is a horrible idea, but what if for instance there's a fight where one guy completley dominates, but can't finish the guy because he has a iron jaw. Or like someone said when Fedor beat Nog, it wasn't a close fight but Nog has a great chin so it would have been a draw.



i can see the logic in that, and i kinda mentioned it in my initial post, i guess like i said before if you are beating somone to the point of domination, if you are that dominant over somone you should be able to find a way to finish it. there are a lot of people with rock hard jaws who have been finished. anderson silva finished both leben and henderson and people brag about theor chins all the time, cabbage might not be the most skilled fight but son of a bitch can he take a punch, and yet he has been knocked out. and there are a ton of other examples. anything can happen in mma, and i guess i kind of feel that if you dont finish your opponent you didnt really defeat them, you outscored them. people have used the example of nog/fedor and koscheck/lytle, and i agree they were both dominant, but the didnt finish, like i said anything can happen if the fight went another five nog or lytle coulda pulled out a submission you never know.

i think people should get credit for dominant decision wins i just think that the judges arent really educated in mma, have no standards for scoring, and judging is very subjective and possibly biased that it leads to a lot of bad decisions and awkward scoring.
Gipper
7/6/08 8:37:43PM
no way in hell decisions should be draw. although there should be way more draws then there have been in the ufc. there are to many guys getting screwed out of close decisions. and we all know every win and loss is huge in the ufc.
tepid55
7/9/08 4:53:54PM
In my opinion, if you can't finish the champ, you don't deserve to be the champ.
JimiMak
7/9/08 6:06:54PM
I've always hated dec's and think they should be draws. But, imho, this requires eliminating time limits. Have a limitless last rd... or have the ref pushing the pace (ie instead of saying "I want action or I'll stand you", he could say "you're in overtime, work or I'm declaring a draw") If ppl couldn't win on dec they would damn sure do more to finish.

Essentially, I hate dec's. I hate the scoring system more. I hate rds less, but w/ the rd system you can't really do this. I think it's an ideal that can never be realised.
bobbydoomocculta
7/9/08 7:45:22PM

Posted by Aaronno9

I think that it should be the case with split decisions. If judges, who should have an extended knowledge of the sport and look to score on the same things cant agree on a decision, then in my mind, somethings up.

No way UD's should be draws though. I mean, look at fights like quarry vs starnes. To call that fight a draw is criminal.Then theirs fights with guys who are just generally hard to put away, Kos vs Lytle being a good example. Kos stomped Lytle for like 90% of the fight, but its really hard for anybody to finish that guy so i think Josh deserved that win.



Preach on brother....
RNC
7/10/08 12:48:27AM
Decisions should not be draws.

You could get your ass kicked every round but never submitted or put away.. Kos vs Lytle. If by avoiding that you would automatically be awarded a draw, by the time round three came you would see a lot of losing fighters avoiding danger just riding it out for a draw.

Another bad thing about it would be for all the great fights that went the distance. Just because the fighters never finished each other, we go and take a great fight and label it a draw.

I would be pissed off after watching wandy vs liddell only to find out at the end it was a tie.


I think there is always going to be controversy with the judging because people view stuff differently. Only when the judges are told how to weigh things will it be better. I'm not saying 3 points for kicks, 5 points for wrestling, 2 for submission attempts, etc, but more as whats more important than the other so all the judges are on the same page. I think that is probably why the scoring is problematic right now. For instance, one judge likes striking better, the other one likes wrestling, they score it different. They need to have clearer guidlines.

IF ANYTHING.. 5 judges would make things a little better. Although there would still be problems like 4-1, is it still a split decision? Stuff like that would still have to get worked out, but I still think it would be way more decisive and would help the scoring.

With the 3 judges, a sudden death round could be interesting if a split decison occured.
MMA_Alex
7/10/08 1:00:11AM

Posted by Dialect

Decisions should not be draws.

You could get your ass kicked every round but never submitted or put away.. Kos vs Lytle. If by avoiding that you would automatically be awarded a draw, by the time round three came you would see a lot of losing fighters avoiding danger just riding it out for a draw.

Another bad thing about it would be for all the great fights that went the distance. Just because the fighters never finished each other, we go and take a great fight and label it a draw.

I would be pissed off after watching wandy vs liddell only to find out at the end it was a tie.


I think there is always going to be controversy with the judging because people view stuff differently. Only when the judges are told how to weigh things will it be better. I'm not saying 3 points for kicks, 5 points for wrestling, 2 for submission attempts, etc, but more as whats more important than the other so all the judges are on the same page. I think that is probably why the scoring is problematic right now. For instance, one judge likes striking better, the other one likes wrestling, they score it different. They need to have clearer guidlines.

IF ANYTHING.. 5 judges would make things a little better. Although there would still be problems like 4-1, is it still a split decision? Stuff like that would still have to get worked out, but I still think it would be way more decisive and would help the scoring.

With the 3 judges, a sudden death round could be interesting if a split decison occured.



Exactly my thoughts. Decisions are necessary and as soon as you make them draws, people will just back off if they are losing and get the draw. Get all the judges on the same page or get 5 judges (I like that idea).
RSH
7/10/08 1:38:11AM
If this were to happen...Machidas record would be so much different with all his decisions.. xD
MoJoy
7/10/08 2:07:16AM
The dude who made the post did not mean this. But it was an indirect insult to all fighters. I have said this before, I am saying it again, and I will say it in the future. More and more fighters will be fighting closer fights, and going to more and more decisions. Fighters are getting better than they ever where, more and more people are getting into this sport, the training is getting exponentially more sophistaced and better, and the rules and rounds also set this up. Its only a matter of if the viewers are smart enough to adapt and appreciate how great these guys become. Machida is the ultimate example. Those who hate on him, it says more about them. Step into that octagon and see what you can do. Dont sit there and say do this do that. How can you expect the sport the progress and continue to see that. Those kind of things where in the old ufc days where there where mismatches or with freaks like Anderson Silva who are Jordan like in how great they are. Fans need to use their brain.
Related Topics